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

Rewrite Bun in Rust has been merged

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 822 posts

Re: Rewrite Bun in Rust has been merged

#61

Post by xiphias2 »

Imustaskforhelp wrote: post #39
xiphias2 wrote: post #6

I'm actually excited for somebody trying experimenting with automated translation, but I'm afraid this will be lots of backwards compatibility issues. I started looking at the commits, and it's basically solving the ,,tests not pass'' problem by changing the tests themselves. The real work of making it working on programs that are already deployed will be just starting now. The only silver lining I see is that the se…

> I started looking at the commits, and it's basically solving the ,,tests not pass'' problem by changing the tests themselves. The real work of making it working on programs that are already deployed will be just starting now. Wow, This is definitely quite something for sure. Can jarred comment about if he has read the commits or not too or respond to your comment, this has basically made me lose the small faith I h…

It's OK, we'll see how it goes. He and Antropic are giving it us for free, and nowdays just forking the old version is easy if a project needs that. Even maintenance is much easier using LLMs.

I'm happy it's not a project I'm depending on, but a large enough project had to try this at some point so that we all can learn from how it goes.

I think this is why Antropic bought bun, so that they can sell big code translation as a feature for all the banks with COBOL code that they want to get rid of for a long time.

Still, those banks / enterprises won't appreciate the number of unit test changes.

And I agree with another comment that Codex xhigh is much better for these kinds of tasks, but still hard on this kind of scale.

Re: Rewrite Bun in Rust has been merged

#63

Post by goyozi »

worble wrote: post #19
tkel wrote: post #4

Turns out "its just an experiment, you all are overreacting" was just a lie to damp criticism. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48019226

Merging a complete rewrite in another language in 9 days seems insane to me. Maybe I'm just too cautious but with something like this I'd split off as a separate binary and get some heavy use customers involved as testers first to see if it causes any unforeseen problems before slowly expanding it out. I'd want to be pretty damn confident it won't cause any regressions before sunsetting the original codebase in favor…

I don’t think you’re too cautious. Big upgrades and rewrites is somewhat of a „work hobby” of mine and this seems waaay too fast. I don’t know how the Bun canary process works and I guess their test suite is better than typical projects but still… I can’t imagine this working out well without testing it on a variety of big projects for a significant amount of time.

There’s probably loads(?) of observable behaviors that people rely on, consciously or not. Even _if_ the new thing is 100% spec compliant, it might still be breaking or otherwise problematic for heavy users.

That said, I’d love to be proven wrong. I use Bun from time to time on small stuff and I enjoy it, so I wish them well (:

Re: Rewrite Bun in Rust has been merged

#65

Post by applfanboysbgon »

NitpickLawyer wrote: post #57
applfanboysbgon wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Claude Code itself is purely vibecoded, both CC and Bun leads are saying that humans are not writing code at Anthropic anymore. It is amazing how much money they intend to squander, because it's all funny money to them, investors just give it to them hand over fist for them to burn. Developing wrappers around the model isn't even the hard part and yet they're going to burn themselves to the ground getting high on the…

> Claude Code itself is purely vibecoded [...] money they intend to squander [...] going to burn themselves to the ground getting high on their own supply. This really really really isn't the burn you think it is. Going from 0 to 2B+ in revenue from a "purely vibecoded" thing is what they've said they're doing, and what they've actually done. Like in already done. It's not going back, no matter how many nuh nuh peopl…

2B+ in revenue on hundreds of billions in investments and future commitments is completely worthless. Anybody can turn $100b into $2b, that's not a fucking accomplishment. And to the extent that something is driving any revenue, it is the model, not the TUI. Any success Claude is having is despite the godawful TUI, not because of it.

Re: Rewrite Bun in Rust has been merged

#66

Post by ares623 »

nicce wrote: post #26
jwpapi wrote: post #13

This will go down in history as the biggest mistake of software engineering of all time. Bun is the runtime of Claude Code, which is the core product of a trillion dollar company, which now sits on a vibe-coded app, where not a single person in the world has a proper mental model of.

Maybe this is the best marketing trick for Claude Code ever. Maybe there was pressure from Anthropic to do this and prove the value. Even partial success is enough to prove the value, justify the value and usage, and AI dependency even further.

It only needs to survive long enough for the IPO

Re: Rewrite Bun in Rust has been merged

#67

Post by q3k »

pixel_popping wrote: post #52
aiscoming wrote: post #36

vibe coders keep saying that now you can have 100x productivity, that you can write a million lines of code in a week and do what would take a team of 10 experienced developers a year. where are all these million lines vibe coded projects? I don't see them. its all hype

Bun is now literally vibe-coded, that's your proof. And Bun developers will solely use LLMs at some point (pretty close to "vibe coding").

Show me some gold instead of a continuous stream of pickaxes.

Re: Rewrite Bun in Rust has been merged

#68

Post by tclancy »

tkel wrote: post #4

Turns out "its just an experiment, you all are overreacting" was just a lie to damp criticism. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48019226

> was just a lie to damp criticism.

Citation needed. Couldn't it just as easily have been one person being as suspicious of the task as everyone else seemed to be?

Post reply on HN