Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Bun's experimental Rust rewrite hits 99.8% test compatibility on Linux x64 glibc

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 754 posts

Re: Bun's experimental Rust rewrite hits 99.8% test compatibility on Linux x64 glibc

#401

Post by Aeolun »

Jarred wrote: post #105
legerdemain wrote: post #38

From 4 days ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48019226 > I work on Bun and this is my branch > > This whole thread is an overreaction. 302 comments about code that does not work. We haven’t committed to rewriting. There’s a very high chance all this code gets thrown out completely. > > I’m curious to see what a working version of this looks, what it feels like, how it performs and if/how hard it’d be to get i…

cargo check reported over 16,000 compiler errors when I wrote that message. It could not print a version number or run JavaScript. I didn’t expect it to work this quickly and I also didn’t expect the performance to be as competitive. There’ll be a blog post with more details.

This does not surprise me in the least. Several Claudes are very good at splitting up and working through them all.

Re: Bun's experimental Rust rewrite hits 99.8% test compatibility on Linux x64 glibc

#402

Post by stingraycharles »

jwpapi wrote: post #399
stingraycharles wrote: post #396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah I also noticed this irony. In addition to accusing the rewrite to being political and not technical, while their whole comment is being political not technical.

I meant my comment not the rewrite

Ah, fair enough then, you mean want to clarify that a bit as it can be interpreted both ways. And the whiny baby part seems a bit uncalled for and distracting from the point you’re trying to make.

Re: Bun's experimental Rust rewrite hits 99.8% test compatibility on Linux x64 glibc

#403

Post by laurencerowe »

hiccuphippo wrote: post #355
laurencerowe wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my experience Bun in Zig compiles more slowly than Deno in Rust.

Single compiles for sure. Where Zig is optimizing compilation is in the incremental compiler, which I've seen compile the compiler itself in an instant after a single line change. Of course, that kind of speed is probably not interesting to some people if the AI is writing tons of lines of code before they go to the compilation step.

I found making single line changes in Bun’s zig code led to very long compiles compared to doing the same in Rust code. It was a while ago though and maybe I was doing something wrong.

Re: Bun's experimental Rust rewrite hits 99.8% test compatibility on Linux x64 glibc

#404

Post by rascul »

awesome_dude wrote: post #369
IshKebab wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Err https://github.com/petgraph/petgraph What are you asking for exactly?

I don't think it's unreasonable, even though I am getting marked down for daring to ask, for people who are making assertions, even if they are well understood *within their own community* (that is, not necessarily universally known) to show examples of what they are talking about. You're correcting someone, so it's clear that your understanding isn't universal, and example code is the absolute minimum.

It doesn't seem clear what code you're asking for.

Re: Bun's experimental Rust rewrite hits 99.8% test compatibility on Linux x64 glibc

#405

Post by shakow »

reactordev wrote: post #398
SuperV1234 wrote: post #346

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Zig doesn't even have RAII...

which is a good thing. C++'s RAII is magic-sauce that does a lot for you when you can simply use `defer` in zig. A constructor is just a function call. A destructor is just a function call.

And a function call is just a fancy JMP, still it's generally acknowledged to be better to have all the bookkeeping automated.

Re: Bun's experimental Rust rewrite hits 99.8% test compatibility on Linux x64 glibc

#406

Post by fg137 »

stouset wrote: post #400
HumanOstrich wrote: post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep, the Anthropic acquisition, this petulant Rust rewrite, and bun's increasingly buggy releases (slop) have caused me to migrate my projects (personal and work) to nodejs+pnpm. The risks of using bun are no longer just those concerns around a newer tech and "drop-in" replacement for nodejs. Now you have to marry Anthropic, Rust, and a founder with conflicting priorities.

Having read the comments from the actual engineer doing this rewrite, the only petulance I have seen is from those reacting so strongly to it.

just wait a year or two.

Re: Bun's experimental Rust rewrite hits 99.8% test compatibility on Linux x64 glibc

#407

Post by fg137 »

Greed wrote: post #388
jwpapi wrote: post #314

Completely unbased, but I don’t want to have to do anything with bun anymore. It’s just a gut feeling, but I don’t trust them and support them. They fork Zig to utilize LLM rewrites and build something the Zig team clearly disregarded (non-deterministic compiling) And now like a whiny baby they LLM rewrite to Rust. There is a very real chance that Zig design philosophy got them to the point where they are now by enfo…

I don't have the personal investment that you appear to have with Bun, but why does this matter? Do you scrutinize the rest of your dependencies this way? Much of working in the JS / NPM ecosystem is already pure faith on un-vetted dependencies, and this appears no different pre or post LLM rewrite. If it satisfies the intended goal and API contract it originally did, is there any difference? Were you carefully readi…

> Do you scrutinize the rest of your dependencies this way?

You don't?

Re: Bun's experimental Rust rewrite hits 99.8% test compatibility on Linux x64 glibc

#408

Post by fg137 »

alice-i-cecile wrote: post #287
BearOso wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It costs several times what it would cost a small team of engineers, even assuming you gave the engineers more time to do it. I'm guessing (wildly) this was around 0.5M USD in compute time. You do get the result quicker, though.

Half a million is pretty damn cheap for a full rewrite into Rust of a million line of code codebase.

But usually companies are much more careful before even spending that half a million. (And most companies don't have that money sitting around.) They would do small PoCs, do comprehensive benchmarks and evaluations of those PoCs, and decide whether to actually go ahead, and, more importantly, stick to it.

Being able to afford half a million doesn't mean you do it on a whim, or just throw all of that away if things don't go well.

But what do I know. I am nothing compared to our AI overlords like Anthropic.

Re: Bun's experimental Rust rewrite hits 99.8% test compatibility on Linux x64 glibc

#409

Post by fg137 »

rst wrote: post #373
yrds96 wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also passing tests doesn't mean something works. Claude code C compiler passed 100% of gcc tests and couldn't even run a hello world...

It couldn't run "hello, world" on systems where the include files were not located in the directory that it expected -- producing instead diagnostics saying, quite clearly, that the header files were not found. On systems where they were, it built versions of postgresql, redis, and several other things which passed their test suites completely. If you've heard this problem described as a fundamental limitation of the…

I have a colleague who multiple times committed code that doesn't work, like at all. Why? His code is only used in tests but not in the actual application. And apparently he never even bothered to click through things even once, let alone reviewing the code.

If it doesn't work, it doesn't. You can find all these excuses. But at the end of the day, there is a difference between an end user being able to get something out of your code or not.

Re: Bun's experimental Rust rewrite hits 99.8% test compatibility on Linux x64 glibc

#410

Post by slopinthebag »

rvz wrote: post #32
Defletter wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly

This is exactly how Anthropic will market this rewrite towards companies thinking about doing more layoffs. 1 person did a rust rewrite that took 6 days that would have taken hundreds of engineers more than a year to do.

The majority of Bun was written by one guy in less than a year. In what world would a rewrite take hundreds of engineers more than a year to do? The hyperbole is getting ridiculous.
Post reply on HN