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

641–650 of 822 posts

Re: Rewrite Bun in Rust has been merged

#641

Post by Capricorn2481 »

Tesl wrote: post #539
tasuki wrote: post #135

Earlier 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

I'm really out the loop here so maybe you can help answer me a question - why is HN unhappy about this rewrite? why are people writing here almost as if they feel betrayed by Bun being rewritten from Zig into Rust? I genuinely don't get it. I've been following this Bun stuff a bit but I don't understand where the HN sentiment is coming from.

The context nobody is mentioning is this came shortly after Bun forked Zig in the name of optimization, but then a Zig maintainer came out and basically said they (Bun) don't know what they're doing, or else they would have known that wasn't an effective optimization.

It outwardly seemed like they forked Zig for a flashy headline, were called out, then immediately started moving to Rust. This, combined with being bought by Anthropic, and plugging vibe coding the whole way, just gives the impression of random and chaotic technical decisions, which is not what people want in software their business depends on.

https://ziggit.dev/t/bun-s-zig-fork-got-4x-faster-compilatio...

Re: Rewrite Bun in Rust has been merged

#642

Post by shimman »

oskarkk wrote: post #549
shimman wrote: post #384

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. Get hired into a company where you have a solid bet on making multi-century lasting generational wealth (>$50,000,000). 2. Every waking moment do everything in your power to boost the company that might give you the ability to define the direction of technology for the rest of your life. 3. Use the only thing you have (bun) to help push you in this direction and do things to help boost LLM marketing (a technology…

> a technology that already deeply struggles to find customers As far as I know it's the opposite, Anthropic struggles to satisfy demand, they have tons of paying customers and their customer base is growing fast.

Wow as far as you know? That settles it then! Just ignore this:

https://www.flyingpenguin.com/wheres-ed-anthropic-told-court...

Re: Rewrite Bun in Rust has been merged

#643

Post by shimman »

vickychijwani wrote: post #609
Tesl wrote: post #539

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm really out the loop here so maybe you can help answer me a question - why is HN unhappy about this rewrite? why are people writing here almost as if they feel betrayed by Bun being rewritten from Zig into Rust? I genuinely don't get it. I've been following this Bun stuff a bit but I don't understand where the HN sentiment is coming from.

The unhappiness is primarily stemming from Bun’s ownership by Anthropic - HN sees this as Anthropic using an OSS project for reckless marketing stunts. For the record I don’t believe it’s a stunt, it’s ridiculous to me - everyone’s just seeing what they want to see out of sheer hate for anything Anthropic does. In any case if the rewrite is really as reckless as many in this thread claim, we will see Bun collapse in…

[flagged]

Re: Rewrite Bun in Rust has been merged

#644

Post by troad »

layer8 wrote: post #358
sunrunner wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure if it's just the leading '+' or if there are other factors for phone number detection on iOS, but on mobile the line count changes are underlined and I can tap it to start a call, which, if it is because of the diff size, is something I find pretty amusing.

The leading “+” is not needed. Numbers with seven digits are automatically hyperlinked (possibly depends on locale). 123456 1234567 12345678

Interesting. Where I am, both six and eight digit phone numbers are valid, but seven digit ones are not, and yet that's the only one that gets linked for me. US assumptions bleeding through, I assume.

Re: Rewrite Bun in Rust has been merged

#645

Post by shimman »

giancarlostoro wrote: post #629
dlopes7 wrote: post #607

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I bet the blog post will make no mention of pressure from anthropic to do this and instead will celebrate the fact that “it passes all tests”, of course omitting how many tests were modified to forcibly pass

Do you have any proof Anthropic pushed for this? Because the author has been clear this was an experiment they wanted to test out on their own, only when it seemed to be in a working state did they consider, okay maybe this might work for us.

Does it take a phd in psychoanalysis to not see that the company that has been marketing the fuck out of lame publicity stunts, to not take advantage of another publicity stunt? Good lord, no wonder the public hates tech workers.

Re: Rewrite Bun in Rust has been merged

#646

Post by sqquima »

Tesl wrote: post #539
tasuki wrote: post #135

Earlier 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

I'm really out the loop here so maybe you can help answer me a question - why is HN unhappy about this rewrite? why are people writing here almost as if they feel betrayed by Bun being rewritten from Zig into Rust? I genuinely don't get it. I've been following this Bun stuff a bit but I don't understand where the HN sentiment is coming from.

My read. If the code has a comprehensive feature test suite, a performance test suite (how long a function takes), and a linter with readability guidelines (e.g. cyclomatic complexity; no code duplication), and the LLM rewrite passes all three, then it should be fine. But I think that in the real world only the first one (functional tests) exists.

Re: Rewrite Bun in Rust has been merged

#647

Post by electroly »

antonvs wrote: post #614
fdsajfkldsfklds wrote: post #485

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is effectively a very expensive and resource-intensive machine translation. As such, there is no increase in consistency or quality of output.

How would you have achieved this “machine translation” without an LLM? It seems to me it would have been highly likely to be more expensive and more resource intensive - if realistically possible at all, short of implementing a general Zig to Rust translator first.

"Short of..." indeed. You already know the answer, although it doesn't need to be general; it only needs to work on a single codebase.

A recent and highly relevant example is the migration of the TypeScript compiler to Go. They did not use an LLM to translate the code. Instead, they used LLM assistance to write a deterministic TypeScript-to-Go translator and then used that to translate the code. I have far more confidence in this approach than in letting the LLMs rip on the translation itself.

Re: Rewrite Bun in Rust has been merged

#648

Post by saltyoldman »

Probably goes without saying but they probably had it check out thousands of projects that use bun and compile them using the new rust binary. And that was probably all automated and lifted into a compute structure that probably did all of that testing in 20 minutes. these people have scale.

Re: Rewrite Bun in Rust has been merged

#649

Post by shimman »

robryan wrote: post #94
applfanboysbgon wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

They appear to be lining up a funding round at a $900 billion dollar valuation. Or to be more conservative they already raised at $380 billion. A long way from worthless.

Yeah are we all forgetting that VC valuations are based on hope and unicorn farts? Just because you give a company $100 billion doesn't turn it into a $900 billion company. Especially when said company has only generated $5billion in total revenue:

https://www.reuters.com/commentary/breakingviews/anthropic-g...

I really wish I could tell people my LLC is worth $100 million because I sold a 0.0001% stake for $10k but I would be called a fraud; however if I was to gamble with pension funds and make the same claim suddenly I'm a visionary?

Good lord, no wonder people want to torch data centers.

Post reply on HN