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

211–220 of 757 posts

Re: My thoughts on the Bun Rust rewrite

#211

Post by Diggsey »

0x000xca0xfe wrote: post #98
SuperV1234 wrote: post #9

> The main problem, however, was code quality. > The sleight of hand misdirects the reader away from the main way bugs are eliminated: by dedicating engineering resources to it. Perhaps the amount of bugs comes from using a C-like language that requires meticulous manual care to avoid writing runtime bugs. Even C++ would be a safer choice because of RAII. When you have to dedicate significant resources to avoid/fix r…

Memory safety problems are still possible in the new Rust Bun: At the time of writing, about 4% of Bun's Rust code sits inside an unsafe block (~13,000 unsafe keywords across ~27,000 lines / ~780,000 lines), and 78% of those blocks are a single line — a pointer that came from C++, or one call into a C library.

Yes - I think the proof of the pudding will be whether they put in the effort to eliminate these unsafe blocks. The conversion to Rust is the starting point that makes this possible, but it's definitely not "done" at this point.

Re: My thoughts on the Bun Rust rewrite

#212

Post by ribelo »

mpalmer wrote: post #144
sarreph wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure: > he was essentially groomed from a young age > It's one thing to choose a poor work-life balance for oneself; a different thing entirely to demand it of others > Jarred was a stinky manager

The second thing is not an ad hominem, it's talking about what he did or how he did it, not who he is.

Casting aspersions without proof, even if it's something everyone knows, is in poor taste and ad hominem. I've never heard a bad word about Jaredd before, so Andrew seems more like a stinky person to me right now.

Re: My thoughts on the Bun Rust rewrite

#214

Post by ModernMech »

0xpgm wrote: post #183
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…

How is it unprofessional when it is simply someone giving their honest personal opinion on an issue that involves something that is valuable to them, on their personal blog nonetheless. Is everyone a walking and talking brand now so that they have to always filter their words, walk on eggshells, hide behind corpo-speak so as to seem 'professional'? More honest discourse is required in today's world, not less. It seem…

> Those people talked to each other. Everybody talked to everybody. The grapevine was large and healthy and full of juicy grapes, and all those grapes contained the juice of the same message: Jarred was a stinky manager.

There’s a big gap between corpo speak and “stinky manager”. That’s nowhere close to professional writing. And he’s not giving us his personal opinion, Kelley is telling us the conclusion of the “grape vine” - he’s reporting on rumors and gossip, and agreeing with it.

Re: My thoughts on the Bun Rust rewrite

#215

Post by ozgrakkurt »

preommr wrote: post #121

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 real…

He is understandably annoyed. It feels like you are making it a problem for people to have emotions and give signs that they have those emotions. He didn’t even write anything direct and it is on his personal blog

Re: My thoughts on the Bun Rust rewrite

#216

Post by ToValueFunfetti »

zeratax wrote: post #190
ToValueFunfetti wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They phrased it poorly, but from context it seems clear they intend the LLM as a less biased third-party measure of the tone which agrees with their own assessment.

which they very much are not

Less biased? Maybe on political questions, etc, but this is a classic NLP task and I expect LLMs to be very reliable here

Re: My thoughts on the Bun Rust rewrite

#217

Post by ozgrakkurt »

nilirl wrote: post #6

> I actually don't have any personal criticisms of Jarred The whole post felt like a personal criticism of Jarred.

I think he messed that part up and it comes off as passive aggressive but he is probably scared of the “outrage” from the angels of the internet about how rude he was to Jarred

Re: My thoughts on the Bun Rust rewrite

#218

Post by neutronicus »

0xpgm wrote: post #183
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…

How is it unprofessional when it is simply someone giving their honest personal opinion on an issue that involves something that is valuable to them, on their personal blog nonetheless. Is everyone a walking and talking brand now so that they have to always filter their words, walk on eggshells, hide behind corpo-speak so as to seem 'professional'? More honest discourse is required in today's world, not less. It seem…

[flagged]

Re: My thoughts on the Bun Rust rewrite

#219

Post by jmstevers »

andrew_ wrote: post #97

[flagged]

> preferably someone less on the spectrum

Are you implying that this reads as all those bad things because Andrew is supposedly autistic? And that if he were to not supposedly have autism, this post wouldn't have read as all those bad things? This reads as an incredibly ableist post authored by someone who thinks autism is an insurmountably negative thing and that someone with "sufficient" autism shouldn't run a project. As if autism is a percentage where once you get past 33% you immediately become incompetent. Be better.

Re: My thoughts on the Bun Rust rewrite

#220

Post by conartist6 »

jdw64 wrote: post #186
conartist6 wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The people who steal with AI and give no credit to the actual creative forces (that they are stamping out) are the fucking rude ones. I just return to them the kindness they show me when they say, "You made this?? I made this!!"

I understand your anger too. AI did steal open source knowledge, and I agree with that part. But separately from that, I think it's a bit unfair to talk about the people associated with it in such a dismissive way. In reality, humans aren't purely rational beings, and I can understand why the Zig philosophy and the Bun manager who joined the AI side might not have looked good from that perspective. But I think that's…

It's not just in the past, and my anger isn't just about what was taken, but the community-destroying use it is being put to: Andrew's job isn't to make a JS runtime, it's to sell the idea that coding is dead.

When he made it his job to sell that narrative, he declared war on me. It should not surprise him or anyone else that I am going to take the war right back to his doorstep.

Post reply on HN