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

Bun support is now limited and deprecated

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 646 posts

Re: Bun support is now limited and deprecated

#291

Post by sleazebreeze »

gpm wrote: post #51
colordrops wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless specific issues have been identified that were introduced by it being "vibe coded", isn't a reaction to reject it outright without actually checking the ground truth just exhibiting the behavior you are criticizing?

I don't see any hypocrisy in the comment you are criticizing. The behavior they are criticizing appears to be vibe coding. How is rejecting something for being vibe coding "exhibiting the behavior" of vibe coding?

You aren't allowed to dismiss vibe coded software based on the slop vibes. It must be well-researched and human reviewed in order to have an opinion.

Re: Bun support is now limited and deprecated

#293

Post by tomjakubowski »

somebehemoth wrote: post #199
doug_durham wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm certain that the maintainers of Bun have excellent understanding of their codebase. What makes you think that they don't? They wrote the code in the first place. They know the architecture. They know what pieces do what functions.

They did not write the rust code. AI wrote that code. Your response is side stepping the primary issue people have with the rewrite: no human has read and understood all the code AI wrote.

I agree but would propose the weaker argument: no set of human contributors have, put together, read and understood all the code. Even in artisanal-coded projects of sufficient size, it's rare that any one human has read and understood all of it.

Re: Bun support is now limited and deprecated

#294

Post by kelipso »

raincole wrote: post #128
827a wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FYI in case you aren't aware, the rewrite was shipped, and then had to be reverted due to issues being discovered. That's "Jarred's high quality bar" you're so confident in.

The whole point of having canary builds is that they're unstable. That's why they're called canary. Rockets failing in test flights isn't a bad thing.

It absolutely is a bad thing. That's why so much effort goes into designing and manufacturing rockets correctly. So the tests go well and you can move onto actual launches. Using that as a metaphor for canary builds displays a lack of knowledge in just multiple areas lol.

Re: Bun support is now limited and deprecated

#296

Post by kibibu »

johnfn wrote: post #145
gpm wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Have you observed Bun have more segfaults, OOMs, etc, since the Rust rewrite? Have you noticed more security vulnerabilities? Have you seen more bugs? (Of course you haven't, the rewrite hasn't even landed yet.) On the flip side it's not on the yt-dlp authors to test Bun's new development process and see if it results in more segfaults, OOMs, security vulnerabilities, etc. In fact it would arguably be negligent to…

> It seems a bit unfortunate to me that they've apparently already intending to never support future releases instead of planning on re-evaluating in the future. On the other hand the yt-dlp developers definitely don't owe anyone anything. I think your final comment gets at it. If they said "OK, I am skeptical, so we're going to pause on updating to see how this Rust thing plays out" -- that sounds like a reasonable…

What's wrong with yt-dlp - an app almost entirety driven by political stances - taking another one regarding llms?

Re: Bun support is now limited and deprecated

#297

Post by jmull »

love2read wrote: post #258
b40d-48b2-979e wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

primeagen's view He's a content creator on youtube, a celebrity, not a serious programmer.

Who cares what you think of someone else’s qualifications? It’s just someone quoting someone to help ground their position. What if it was a journalist writing about a security vulnerability then a programmer quoting them, would that count then?

If it doesn't matter, why did the previous poster mention them?

It's pretty clearly a type of argument called an "appeal to authority", where an authority is cited to add credibility to a position. It's usually considered a pretty weak form of argument, but it can be effective. So the credibility of the cited authority is relevant.

Re: Bun support is now limited and deprecated

#299

Post by kibibu »

johnfn wrote: post #267
oaweoifjwpo wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I meant political in the more modern sense of "appealing to emotion rather than thought". I'm not familiar with this definition in any modern or archaic sense. Is there somewhere I can read about it? Just because a decision is not directly engineering related (which I'm not even convinced this is) doesn't mean that it's not thoughtful.

That's fair - I updated my comment a little. What I mean is that the decision was driven by an ideological basis, not an empirical one. Bun was written with AI, AI doesn't fit with my ideology, therefore I reject it. As opposed to Bun has these new problems X Y and Z, therefore I reject it.

The irony of this comment on an app that is:

- free and open source, which is an ideology, and that

- expands access to otherwise locked down media, which is again an ideological stance

Re: Bun support is now limited and deprecated

#300

Post by torben-friis »

827a wrote: post #86
torben-friis wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have there been any significant issues caused by the vibecoded translation? To be clear, I'm not implying support for the merge. I am against this whole YOLO approach to engineering. Just curious how the switch is going since I haven't seen any news since the merge announcement.

IMO the source of the new code is less important than the sheer volume of it. Bun does not need to be entirely rewritten; certainly not over a period of a week, possibly not even over a period of a year. Stability is hard-fought and battle-tested. Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face; and every repository has passing tests until it runs production code.

I agree, I'm just wondering whether the punches have come already. Honestly, the fact that they haven't is against my expectations, my guess was that we'd see a noisy one here a day after merging.
Post reply on HN