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

421–430 of 757 posts

Re: My thoughts on the Bun Rust rewrite

#421

Post by guardiangod »

ventana wrote: post #222
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…

> this just isn't the kind of professionalism needed for a serious project I don't immediately see how much the seriousness of the project is related to the language the author chose in their personal blog post. It's similar to saying that Linux could not have become a serious project because of the way Linus communicated in his emails.

Linus always backs up his insults with technical reasonings on why the other side is wrong though. You might not agree with his reasons, but at least he provided them.

Re: My thoughts on the Bun Rust rewrite

#422

Post by conartist6 »

threatofrain wrote: post #407
conartist6 wrote: post #387

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but getting a bad perf review then, is that necessarily a personal attack? Andrew and Jarred and I are all peers in this situation. You get reviews from your peers.

I don't understand, why isn't your attention focused on the claim that Jarred lies in professional settings and in public? Jarred himself shows up to post receipts with barely any commentary, showing where the focus is. Anyways, what do you think about Jarred? Do you think he lies about Andrew in public? What was the term Andrew used? Outright fabrication ?

I value competence above all else, and bullshitting (e.g. using AI to say you used AI) is the opposite of competence.

I wouldn't claim he's lying because I have no first-hand knowledge to base such a claim on. I just think his whole persona is about selling the idea that "you don't need to look at the code anymore". I would have a hard time calling that a lie because I think he really believes it. It does mean that I think of him as a fool or a pawn, though: a friendly face whose purpose is to give a feeling of safety and human harmlessness to a destructive agenda of machine supremacy.

My moral condemnation for that is as strong as if I thought he was simply lying, and perhaps stronger.

Re: My thoughts on the Bun Rust rewrite

#423

Post by orangeisthe »

mtlynch wrote: post #406
tipiirai wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure I follow. Is "fuzzing their Zig code" somehow related to adding a Fuzzilli integration to Bun?

Yes, "their" refers to Bun's code, not the Zig compiler's code. Fuzzili is a fuzzing engine for JavaScript, so integrating it into Bun means that Fuzzili is fuzzing Bun.[0] From the Bun post[1] > We fuzz Bun's runtime APIs 24/7 using Fuzzilli, the JavaScript engine fuzzer used by V8 & JavaScriptCore From Andrew Kelley's post today[2]: > The post claims they were fuzzing their Zig code, while during our calls the whol…

Why are you not using hyperlinks and adding links citation style?

Re: My thoughts on the Bun Rust rewrite

#424

Post by threatofrain »

hoppp wrote: post #352
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…

I don't think he is attacking, he's just organising his thoughts publicly.

While organizing his thoughts publicly, Andrew says that the Bun team at large engages in outright fabrication. What do we think about that? Does Jarred and his team lie about professional matters to fellow peers in the field?

Re: My thoughts on the Bun Rust rewrite

#425

Post by Philpax »

orangeisthe wrote: post #423
mtlynch wrote: post #406

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, "their" refers to Bun's code, not the Zig compiler's code. Fuzzili is a fuzzing engine for JavaScript, so integrating it into Bun means that Fuzzili is fuzzing Bun.[0] From the Bun post[1] > We fuzz Bun's runtime APIs 24/7 using Fuzzilli, the JavaScript engine fuzzer used by V8 & JavaScriptCore From Andrew Kelley's post today[2]: > The post claims they were fuzzing their Zig code, while during our calls the whol…

Why are you not using hyperlinks and adding links citation style?

This is standard convention on HN for when you have more than one link. HN does not support masked links.

Re: My thoughts on the Bun Rust rewrite

#426

Post by dpatterbee »

dwattttt wrote: post #413
dpatterbee wrote: post #400

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're, intentionally or not, misinterpreting my comment. Language is used to convey meaning, and Andrew wrote words that presumably meant what he meant them to mean. However, in many comments on here people are not commenting on "what he meant them to mean" and instead focusing on which words he chose to convey that meaning. I'm sure Andrew could've switched out every word in the post and still conveyed the…

> And I don't see how this affects how "professional" this is, unless "professional" is just performative nonsense and nothing to do with the substance of the text? It changes my opinion of whether I trust ark to actually be right, or whether he has (and will continue to) let his emotions get in the way. The particular quote I noted was > We probably tried to tell you to try enabling it and you didn't listen. We have…

Do you normally assume that if someone shows any emotion that that emotion is "get[ting] in the way"? People's emotions are influenced by real things, and they don't have to speak dispassionately about those things. Especially when the blog post is entitled "My Thoughts on ---".

I don't know what you're getting at with your final paragraph, I feel like he's in a pretty good position to assert something he probably did or did not do.

Re: My thoughts on the Bun Rust rewrite

#427

Post by asa400 »

orangedog wrote: post #291
dofm wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FWIW I was really interested in Zig and now I see that its lead developer is thin-skinned and bitter and has confused minimal criticism of his project with an attack on his person. This is such a bad look and it's also flatly self-contradictory. He spends time in his conclusion asserting he doesn't have any personal criticisms of Jarred but he's fully happy to claim, reframe and repeat everyone else's, even criticism…

This entire thread puts me out on devs. I stuns me that there are this many people who either excuse or cheer on being hateful. Wanting to use a project becaues the author was this rude....what? Just a complete lack of emotional intelligence. You do not treat people like this.

I've read some of your other comments in this thread and I completely agree.

It's dismaying how many devs seem unable to distinguish poor project leadership/communication from being a bold truth-teller "telling it like it is".

This is a major project lead demonstrating that if things don't go well between him and you, he's going to retcon your whole relationship, collect gossip about your company and management style, chastise you for your life choices (taking venture capital?), talk shit about your code and your project, question your moral choices, and then publish all of it.

This insistence on "being right" is really caustic. It's just ugly.

Re: My thoughts on the Bun Rust rewrite

#428

Post by dpatterbee »

dminik wrote: post #410
dpatterbee wrote: post #365

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know why choice of language is having such sway in determining what you view as professional. Maybe it's just a cultural difference but where I'm from people just use the words they need to to communicate what they're trying to say. If something's a shit show I'd prefer someone just said it rather than dancing around it with corpo-speak.

As someone from a cultural background that is considered very direct and blunt, I can say that there is a rather fine line between being direct and being an asshole. This post devolves into a personal attack one sentence in. There was no reason to go into Jared's life at all to begin with. The entire post doesn't need to exist at all if you're confident that Bun leaving will have zero or even positive impact. Why tur…

If you view that first sentence as a personal attack I'm not really sure what response I can make here. As a sentence it almost says nothing at all. 'When Jarrad started he gave off a real "starting" vibe'.

Also I learned nothing about Jarred's life from this post, so I don't understand that point. That he lives or lived in San Francisco I guess, and didn't go to university?

Re: My thoughts on the Bun Rust rewrite

#429

Post by hoppp »

threatofrain wrote: post #424
hoppp wrote: post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think he is attacking, he's just organising his thoughts publicly.

While organizing his thoughts publicly, Andrew says that the Bun team at large engages in outright fabrication. What do we think about that? Does Jarred and his team lie about professional matters to fellow peers in the field?

Maybe their concept of fuzzing is different?

Jarred commented on the top that they use fuzzilli , which is a javascript engine fuzzer.

But zig has a built in integrated fuzzer!

Andrew must have been talking about the built in fuzzer because that's what is associated with zig.

zig build test --fuzz

Re: My thoughts on the Bun Rust rewrite

#430

Post by hoppp »

Jarred wrote: post #274

I have learned so much reading Andrew’s code and as I said in the original post: Bun would never have happened without Zig. > The post claims they were fuzzing their Zig code, while during our calls the whole Bun team told us that they were not fuzzing anything. This appears to be an outright fabrication. Fuzzilli integration: https://github.com/oven-sh/bun/pull/24826 Merged PRs fixing issues Fuzzilli found in Bun’s…

Andrew means the zig build test --fuzz command probably the built in zig fuzzer, that's the tool that is in his scope.
Post reply on HN