This is kinda sad, I liked having bun as a good example of software in Zig
Rewrite Bun in Rust has been merged
481–490 of 822 posts
Re: Rewrite Bun in Rust has been merged
#482When announcements say that rewrite took 1 week, I wonder how much time went into preparing this file with very detailed instructions on mapping Zig to Rust idioms: https://github.com/oven-sh/bun/commit/46d3bc29f270fa881dd573... On top of that, if you look at 'Pointers & ownership' and 'Collections' sections, the Bun codebase is already prepared, using internal smart pointer types that map 1-to-1 to Rust equivalents,…
It's the same thing with their gcc stunt.
It would be _so_ easy to alleviate any doubt from this and hype up the IPO even more. They just need start a separate repo with all the hidden work they needed to do to prod the AI along, and let everyone replicate the results. After all, isn't that what all their customers are trying to achieve? A million lines of usable code in "7" days? Never mind the fact that it will also boost Anthropic's usage metrics as everyone tries to replicate it into their workflows.
If it was beautiful, they would've started with a blog post about this with links and instructions. Perhaps I will still be proven wrong and a blog post is being written as I type this.
Re: Rewrite Bun in Rust has been merged
#483Earlier quoted context omitted.
Heavy implications on how the future will be formed if things go well with this port. It would prove a lot of people wrong if things go well 3 months down the road.
Not really - three months is nowhere near long enough to demonstrate if a large piece of software has issues or not.
With the amount of applications running on Bun? I’d say enough.
Re: Rewrite Bun in Rust has been merged
#484Having just migrated all my teams repos to Bun, I feel… stupid. I was already feeling a little nervous by the time of the acquisition but this is pretty rough.
Re: Rewrite Bun in Rust has been merged
#485When announcements say that rewrite took 1 week, I wonder how much time went into preparing this file with very detailed instructions on mapping Zig to Rust idioms: https://github.com/oven-sh/bun/commit/46d3bc29f270fa881dd573... On top of that, if you look at 'Pointers & ownership' and 'Collections' sections, the Bun codebase is already prepared, using internal smart pointer types that map 1-to-1 to Rust equivalents,…
Ignoring things like whether the Rust that was output could be deemed qualitatively good, whether the resulting line count is appropriate, how much the codebase was ready or primed for this kind of exercise going in, and so on, is it fair to say that a 622 line artefact created up front is a relatively small cost for a potential increase in consistency or quality of output when the output is ~1M LoC? It seems like th…
This is effectively a very expensive and resource-intensive machine translation. As such, there is no increase in consistency or quality of output.
Re: Rewrite Bun in Rust has been merged
#486Earlier quoted context omitted.
You, nine days ago[0]: > 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. Maybe... it wasn't such an overreaction? [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48019226
You're not alone in voicing this, another (now dead) comment did it earlier too with a bit more of an emotional response ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48134229 ). Still, do you folks never do something to see how you feel about something, then chose to go one way or another? I'm not sure why it's so hard to see that it was an overreaction at the time, because it was an experiment, then at one point it stoppe…
It's a high profile open source project. While Bun/Jarred don't owe anything to anyone, nobody should be surprised when decisions like these result in strong backlash.
Imagine if Guido or Linus said a couple of days ago that they're just experimenting and then submitted and merged complete machine-assisted rewrite of CPython or Linux in Rust.
Re: Rewrite Bun in Rust has been merged
#487Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes sure it's ok to change your mind. But don't you think the people Jarred accused of "overreacting" in retrospect didn't?
The top comment at that link points out how many of the sibling comments are delirious and emotional, kneejerk responding to the news rather than giving any sort of sober analysis. That people were overreacting with emotional meltdowns (common in AI-related threads) is perfectly compatible with the branch making enough progress to get merged.
Anyone who disagrees with me is having an emotional meltdown and obviously they're delirious AI-haters.
Re: Rewrite Bun in Rust has been merged
#488On one hand I kinda feel validated for having jumped ship on Zig 3+ Years ago[1] and moving everything to Rust[2], with the language simply being too unstable and unsafe in my eyes, despite my love for comptime and people arguing that Bun and Tigerbeetle were proof that it wasn't the languages fault. But I also feel bad for the Zig project to loose one of their flagship projects, because while I find the project ulti…
> I wonder if Tigerbeetle will also have problems arguing for their solution now that the other project they can point to for customer assurance is gone. In general, we never like to appeal to popularity (a logical fallacy), but why would you assume here that we would point to Bun specifically (or any project for that matter) [1] as an example of Zig’s quality? We prefer to judge Zig’s quality on its own intrinsic me…
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the three largest Zig project (by far, with a huge gap between them and the rest of the pack) are Bun, Ghostty, and TigerBeetle.
A language so niche that it only has 3 major projects is a liability. Now it has 2 major projects, one of which is yours. Even I as a weird language connoisseur would raise an eyebrow at that.
After switching from Zig to Rust, I felt like the language was helping me improve the correctness of my project, to argue that the fuzzing of your project helps improve the correctness of the language feels backwards and adds to my suspicions.
We both know that fuzzing is great, but that wether you fuzz with 1000 cores or 1.000.000 cores, at an exponentially growing state space it doesn't make (that much of a) difference (I know that you guys are not doing naive fuzzing, which is extremely cool, but the shape of the problem is still O of evil shaped). Most things you can find with fuzzing are shallow-ish, and if you want to go deeper you need formal verification (for which a strong type system is a good first approximation and I'm not aware of something like Kani in Zig).
I like TigerBeetle and I still wish you guys all the success in the world, but I can't help and wonder where you could be by now if your language was lifting you up, instead of you having to lift up your language.
Re: Rewrite Bun in Rust has been merged
#489This kind of frivolous nonsense disqualifies bun from ever being a serious option to me. I'm not building any kind of software used in a professional setting on 1M lines of unreviewed code.
Re: Rewrite Bun in Rust has been merged
#490When announcements say that rewrite took 1 week, I wonder how much time went into preparing this file with very detailed instructions on mapping Zig to Rust idioms: https://github.com/oven-sh/bun/commit/46d3bc29f270fa881dd573... On top of that, if you look at 'Pointers & ownership' and 'Collections' sections, the Bun codebase is already prepared, using internal smart pointer types that map 1-to-1 to Rust equivalents,…
> using internal smart pointer types that map 1-to-1 to Rust equivalents
Smart pointers weren't invented by Rust. If you write code in other languages with pointers you mentally model the same types already.
> and `bun_collections` Rust crate already exists.
This is wrong. It's part of the PR in the codebase. It did not previously exist.