Live data from Hacker News

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

twitter.com

421–430 of 754 posts

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

#421
post #399

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Don't give them too much credit, they responded to other comments clearly referring to the developers' comments on twitter about his technical motivations. He's just backtracking now due to your comment.

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

#422

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.

How is defer not magic sauce?

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

#423
post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Much less than what it’d costs for a team of rust engineers. This is both amazing and scary; has been for a while now.

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.

> I'm guessing (wildly) this was around 0.5M USD in compute time.

That seems like an especially wild guess. If you take e.g. Opus 4.7 prices, and make the assumption that you are consuming roughly $30 for every million tokens of output (this comes from just summing the $25 per million tokens of output and $5 per million tokens of input and assuming that caching basically makes all that work out), and assume an output rate of 80 tokens per second (which seems like a high estimate based on online searching), it would take you about 2411 days of non-stop Opus 4.7 usage to hit 500k in API spend.

The only way you could possibly run that amount of usage in 6 days is if you were running ~400 instances in parallel. From personal experience, that seems crazy high for this project.

I think you are off by at least an order of magnitude (potentially even 2 depending on how the person is managing agents, but I could see something like dozens of agents 24/7, so I'm way less confident in 2, but I think it's still more likely to be closer to 10-20k in API spend).

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

#424
post #30

What does this mean for Zig? Few big popular projects use Zig, if they start to move away from it, what Zig's future will look like?

I think the issue is that Zig lost their biggest project, which was a posterboy project for real uses of Zig. Worse, the project felt like Zig wasn't meeting their needs, to the point they abandoned Zig and rewrote their entire project in a different language. Really bad signal for anyone thinking of using Zig for a big project. It is still in beta, but has there been any situation like this, where a upcoming program…

> I think the issue is that Zig lost their biggest project, which was a posterboy project for real uses of Zig.

Bun, Ghostty, and TigerBeetle are 3 popular projects that I have heard about using zig.

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

#425

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Running an experiment, the experiment being more successful than you thought, and then deciding to put more effort into a bigger experiment is not hypocrisy. It’s engineering. If you think some of the objective facts they’re putting out (like test coverage and performance) are lies, go and prove it instead of appealing to emotion.

Especially if given near unlimited tokens to burn through, because any level of success fuels the LLM hype machine, which brings ROI. > It’s engineering. Significantly, but not totally. The marketing value can't be ignored.

What do you think one would have to pay to have flesh-and-blood engineers get a cross-language port of a codebase of over half a million lines with a broad test suite to over 99% conformance? I think it would be astronomically high, especially given that for this specific project your hiring pool is going to be limited to people who can get up to speed with Zig and JavaScriptCore right away (or you’re going to have to pay them for low output for a while as you train them). Also it would be literally impossible to do in 6 days no matter how much money you paid, so unless they’re lying about that it’s still something that couldn’t have been done prior for any price.

More handwaving about the LLM hype machine is incredibly boring and enough of it is spewed everywhere that whatever social good it was going to accomplish must have already happened by now. If you want to inject reality into the situation, talk about reality (like Anthropic is at least pretending to).

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

#426
post #30

What does this mean for Zig? Few big popular projects use Zig, if they start to move away from it, what Zig's future will look like?

Honestly I think, at least to the Zig community, But isn't the biggest name we'd think of. There's been some philosophical friction between the Zig project and Bun (Zig is pretty anti-AI and favor methodical thinking through of problems, while Bun is more move fast and break things). I think TigerBeetle is a better representation of what Zig can do. TigerBeetle is fuzzed within an inch of its life, and is absolutely rock solid. The people who work on it are brilliant programmers who care a lot about correctness. They find that Zig lets them express their ideas succinctly, while still giving them the needed power.

When I read about Bun, I get the sense that Jarron has different priorities, mainly moving quickly. Bun also implements a lot of userspace APIs, since the core engine is JavaScriptCore which is written in C++. I think Rust really shines in applications programming, so I guess it makes sense that Rust has lined up with Jarron's needs. I'd be interested to see what JavaScriptCore would look like in Zig versus Rust, I think Zig might have an edge in the core interpreter and JIT.

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

#428

I love Bun & Zig and this feels a bit like my parent are getting a divorce. I thought it was a bit strange that Bun did not sponsor the Zig foundation while others much smaller companies have.

Are you kidding? IIRC Oven gave $5k/month to Zig for years. And btw that was before they got acquired for billions, when they had no income at all.

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

#429
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'm team Zig in most cases but I genuinely think they are better off with Rust. They have had a lot of buffer overruns and segfaults as a result of undisciplined Zig code. I think Rust actually is a better technical choice for them.

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

#430
post #392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The spice core that ngspice is built off is terrible code. It has a long history going back to 1970s era fortran. Starting fresh is probably preferable

> The spice core that ngspice is built off is terrible code. It has a long history going back to 1970s era fortran. Starting fresh is probably preferable That code is also hyper-optimized for performance . I sincerely doubt you are going to match the performance easily with any random rewrite. Now, if you had a very clear idea of why the code was making assumptions from the 1990s that are no longer valid, then you mi…

> and generally resistant to parallelization (each device can have its own model which are a unique set of linear differential equations).

Solving sets of differential equations is something that's parallelizable though

See for example how there's physics engines running on GPU. That's mechanics and not electric circuits, however it's differential equations all the same.

Post reply on HN