Live data from Hacker News

Claude Code uses Bun written in Rust now

simonwillison.net

271–280 of 920 posts

Re: Claude Code uses Bun written in Rust now

#271
post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Literally who cares what language a JS toolset is written in? Maybe you're being coy by asking a rhetorical question you already know the answer to but I'll answer as if you asked sincerely... There are 2 different groups interacting with software products: (1) end-users : this is where the "Who cares what language it's written in?!?" is usually applicable. E.g. The finance guys using MS Excel don't care whether it'…

I think you're missing group 3, which is the "assume bad faith and/or bad outcome from any possible change to anything, and especially changes to open source projects that can be interpreted as exogenous, e.g. from an acquirer, and especially if that acquirer is a gigantic commercial entity." There are not nearly enough disenfranchised Bun-on-Zig contributors to make a dent in this conversation. There are lots of Gro…

I think most of the naysayers are in group 3 because there’s a lot of anger but never a single link to a blog post or analysis done by anyone to demonstrate a regression. not one. There are some that analyzed the quality of the initial rust code and use of unsafe but Claude has been chewing through those as I understand.

Re: Claude Code uses Bun written in Rust now

#272
post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And GP is full of shit as the main branch is the v1.4.0. it is not "released" yet as it is not finished. It is available as canary version.

So Anthropic ships with unfinished version of bun. Doesn’t sound like responsible software deployment

[deleted]

Re: Claude Code uses Bun written in Rust now

#273
post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It largely works and it's a massive business success. This is the classic engineer asking the 'why this technology?' to what amounts to a business question. They chose it early on, it works, and it makes obscene amounts of revenue. End of story. That doesn't mean it was the "greatest" choice, or has a perfect technical architecture. Rewrites are never easy, even the bun rewrite. But a non-UI developer tool with a rig…

They succeeded in spite of their tech choices. Their model outshone it, which is an extremely rare thing to happen and not something they could've counted on. In any other timeline they could've/would've been hurt by their choices. It's like "why did you go all in on buying scamcoin 3.0 as your investment strategy?" -- "I 5xed my money! End of story! It was fine!"

> They succeeded in spite of their tech choices.

Or those choices just don't matter, it's fundamentally just "tabs vs spaces".

Re: Claude Code uses Bun written in Rust now

#274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This feels like such an absurd, bad faith take I keep hearing. In Zig, every single memory operation is unsafe. And Bun must interface with C code that has no safe interface, necessitating a ton of boundary-level unsafe behaviors. There's too much, sure, but can we at least be honest and reasonable?

What's the point of rewriting it to Rust if you're going to, on purpose, disable the most prominent benefits of using Rust?

I'm not a rust dev. But I've been once asked to take care of a TypeScript codebase and the thing was littered with so many casts to `any`, you're wondering why they bothered with TypeScript in the first place. Some people do choose tech on a vibe and not any real analysis.

Re: Claude Code uses Bun written in Rust now

#275
post #5

> For me this outputs Bun v1.4.0 (macOS arm64). The most recent release of Bun on GitHub is currently v1.3.14 from May 12th, so that v1.4.0 version number in Claude supports them shipping a preview of a not-yet-released Bun version. And so, the FOSS project "Bun" silently dies in darkness and is now something completely else. I'm glad I still had "Investigate if Bun is worth it" on my TODO list and hadn't yet gotten…

Why does changing to Rust kill the project? I don't understand the point here.

I didn't read OP as complaining about the rewrite, but about the (lack of clear) governance after being acquired by Anthropic.

Re: Claude Code uses Bun written in Rust now

#276
post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It largely works and it's a massive business success. This is the classic engineer asking the 'why this technology?' to what amounts to a business question. They chose it early on, it works, and it makes obscene amounts of revenue. End of story. That doesn't mean it was the "greatest" choice, or has a perfect technical architecture. Rewrites are never easy, even the bun rewrite. But a non-UI developer tool with a rig…

They succeeded in spite of their tech choices. Their model outshone it, which is an extremely rare thing to happen and not something they could've counted on. In any other timeline they could've/would've been hurt by their choices. It's like "why did you go all in on buying scamcoin 3.0 as your investment strategy?" -- "I 5xed my money! End of story! It was fine!"

What do you mean in spite of their tech choices? When have the tech choices ever been an issue in the lifespan of Claude Code? From where I sit, it seems like their tech choices enabled them to create an industry-defining product.

Re: Claude Code uses Bun written in Rust now

#278

Bah. Personally my take on the entire affair is quite negative, whatever Jarred or Simonw says about it. I think Bun owned by Anthropic and the entire rewrite with AI is not the real point (even if it's quite interesting, though). My take is that Jarred, and Bun,didn't demonstrate a serious, adult approach, from "this is my branch, you are overreacting" message to just proceeding with a 1mil+ PR merged in less than m…

[flagged]

Normal users, anti-AI dinosaurs / zig fanatics, and no one else. That's a nice echo chamber you have going there.

Re: Claude Code uses Bun written in Rust now

#279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The criticism didn't appear to me to be that the solution didn't work, just that many of the working solutions we are selecting are dangerously overcomplicated due to shortsighted decisionmaking. The benefits of throwing redundant stacks of abstraction atop each other in terms of time to market are questionable, and obviously absent in every other metric.

So, you have a vibe-coded TUI which happens to work, and then, as a workaround you vibe-translate its engine to make it more performant. Where does that leave you ? Basically, fully dependent on AI to fix whatever breaks. Workaround on a workaround is the way I see it, and it aligns with the AI design mentality in general. For a variety of usecases, this might still be a win in terms of overall cost. But, for softwar…

I'm going to guess Anthropic are OK with "fully dependent on AI to fix whatever breaks".

Re: Claude Code uses Bun written in Rust now

#280
I'm looking at this situation strictly as 'What's possible today'. If a 1M lines code rewrite from one language to another goes into production in 1 month, that's a very strong signal that the models are now insanely capable.

My anxiety before merging a 2K lines PR is greatly reduced after 3 frontier models (Fable, 5.6 and kimi K3) finds no issues in it.

Just 6 months ago (Opus 4.6) this was not true, a big PR would have countless number of issues.

Aside from the human drama, the message to all of us is - these things are ready for whatever your imagination can throw at them.

I think that's exactly what Anthropic wanted to communicate.

Post reply on HN