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

My thoughts on the Bun Rust rewrite

andrewkelley.me

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 757 posts

Re: My thoughts on the Bun Rust rewrite

#121

Post by preommr »

There are astute comments about the post's tone elsewhere in this thread[0]

But this killed my hopes for Zig.

The drama is fun, and Andrew is maybe even admirable in his earnest, but this just isn't the kind of professionalism needed for a serious project. I know that's boring and uninspired, but that's what I want my tech stack and it's management to be.

Also, maybe Jarred was a net negative, but bun was also a really big project using Zig, and the project leaving isn't as good for Zig as Andrew is making it seem. It genuinely seems he's putting a lot of priority on purity and ideology over just growth of the language. And I am sorry, but adoption and reaching critical mass is an important part of a serious programming language.

[0] esp. nilirl.

Re: My thoughts on the Bun Rust rewrite

#123

Post by tialaramex »

cyber1 wrote: post #31
Tiberium wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But Rust is exactly the tooling that gives humans and LLMs a lot of those checks for free, and things like RAII.

If you use Rust the way it was designed to be used, rather than relying on countless "unsafe" blocks, you need to redesign the entire codebase architecture to make it compatible with the borrow checker rules.

All that unsafe does in these cases is enable the "unsafe super-powers" which the compiler can't check, thus shifting the responsibility onto the author. But for example if you've got some code which doesn't borrow check, and you just sprinkle unsafe keywords on it, now you've got code which still doesn't borrow check and diagnostics telling that this unsafe keyword was futile and you should remove that.

I haven't reviewed this code, but the percentages described don't sound like they'd need a huge architectural overhaul to use much less unsafe, it might take more actual human effort than they want though.

Re: My thoughts on the Bun Rust rewrite

#124

Post by elktown »

mtndew4brkfst wrote: post #103
dnoberon wrote: post #74

Not sure a personal attack against Jarred really helps the case for using Zig. He could have and should have focused on the language and not “a stinky manager”. Honestly, this makes me want to steer clear of Andrew as much as Jarred.

Andrew's online social behavior is largely a streak of pettiness imo. This is not even close to the first time I've seen him write something I felt was overtly mean spirited, not just euphemistically "blunt". "Was silence not an option?"

Given the chronology set out by Andrew, I think it's warranted anyway.

Re: My thoughts on the Bun Rust rewrite

#125

Post by lins1909 »

tuckwat wrote: post #101

This is unprofessional and embarrassing for Zig. I know very little about Jared but his article yesterday, which I read, seemed appreciative of Zig. I now learn he's donated significant chunks of money to them. This entire article is publicly and personally attacking him for choosing a different product. It's insane to me that Andrew thinks this post will somehow exonerate Zig when it really just makes them look chil…

It's kind of strange to not engage with any of the points made in the article. Unlike you, I don't think the post makes them look childish at all. I think it raises a lot of valid points and makes me want to use Zig more.

Re: My thoughts on the Bun Rust rewrite

#126

Post by androiddrew »

Tiberium wrote: post #4

It feels like the first half of blog post is less of "thoughts on the Bun Rust Rewrite" and more "I don't like Jarred, he's a bad programmer and manager". Maybe I'm wrong, but it strongly feels this way. I'm not saying that Andrew is right or wrong, it's just that you could throw out most of the first half of the post and not lose anything actually on topic. > But having graduated from the Thiel Fellowship school of…

I mean I wouldn’t want to work for Andrew Kelley either. Doesn’t mean I don’t see utility in zig. Taking swings at a pretty toxic culture (silicon valley) while refreshing also paints a target on your back. This isn’t unhinged shit though so it hasn’t dissuaded me from learning Zig

Re: My thoughts on the Bun Rust rewrite

#127

Post by grahar64 »

tuckwat wrote: post #110
hazn wrote: post #39

Despite stated otherwise in the post, this is a personal attack. Anyway, let's try to discuss something more technical: I predict Zig will lose steam, and in 2027, will lose relevance: 1) It's hardcore Anti-AI 2) It's moved to Codeberg 3) It doesn't have the momentum to sustain the disadvantages of these two decisions The project will in max 2 years make a blog post, not admitting to their mistakes, telling themselve…

4) It's led by an emotionally unintelligent individual who will personally attack you for choosing alternative products.

Like Linus?

Re: My thoughts on the Bun Rust rewrite

#128

Post by norman784 »

jorisw wrote: post #44
dwdz wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The sole reason for that rewrite was Zig creator announcing he won't be accepting AI contributions. It hurt Anthropic's feelings.

[citation needed]

Here[0] are other reasons besides AI

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

Re: My thoughts on the Bun Rust rewrite

#129

Post by lins1909 »

alfiedotwtf wrote: post #75
jdw64 wrote: post #3

I read the post and roughly summarized it as: 1.It felt uncomfortable that Bun was presented as a representative example of Zig. From the internal Zig perspective, it looked more like a bad example of how to use Zig. 2.It felt uncomfortable that they spoke as if Rust prevents things that could actually be handled by Zig's style guide. 3.I(OP,andrewkelly) don't think badly of Jarred as a person, but after signing a co…

Not accepting a PR because it was purely written by AI is like saying PRs will only be accepted if the developer used a standing desk for more than 75% of the time during the code's creation. In the end, as long as the code is not shit, who cares how the sausage was made!

I find it hard to believe you actually think those two things are similar or equivalent. I've heard many bad analogies in my life but this is so funny that it makes me think you're being sarcastic.

Re: My thoughts on the Bun Rust rewrite

#130

Post by vitaminCPP »

fwlr wrote: post #69

I found this post very refreshing! I’m sure it would have been very tempting to one-up the “PR-speak” of the Bun post. Likewise, it would have been very tempting to include the same set of facts that reflect negatively on Jarred, while studiously concealing one’s own opinion (eg “I heard people called him a stinky manager. I am not saying that, other people are, but I’m not”). I appreciated that it was just … genuine…

Agreed. This blog post strikes the balance between PR-speak and x.com
Post reply on HN