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

Cruller: Bun's Zig Runtime, Continued on Zig 0.16

ziggit.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 127 posts

Re: Cruller: Bun's Zig Runtime, Continued on Zig 0.16

#41

Post by Zambyte »

virajk_31 wrote: post #26
Juncture0 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems you misunderstand what happened to Bun: Anthropic has burned some investor money for a PR stunt -- our LLM can port this -- and also to punish Zig which dared to ban LLM contributions by taking away a significant project from the ecosystem. It worked, Rust didn't dare to enact a similar ban.

Anthropic tried hard to port using their LLMs but their models were not trained on enough zig corpus hence failed and they blamed it on Zig's principles

Claude Code uses Bun written in Rust now

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48966569

What failed?

Re: Cruller: Bun's Zig Runtime, Continued on Zig 0.16

#42

Post by naiveter »

virajk_31 wrote: post #26
Juncture0 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems you misunderstand what happened to Bun: Anthropic has burned some investor money for a PR stunt -- our LLM can port this -- and also to punish Zig which dared to ban LLM contributions by taking away a significant project from the ecosystem. It worked, Rust didn't dare to enact a similar ban.

Anthropic tried hard to port using their LLMs but their models were not trained on enough zig corpus hence failed and they blamed it on Zig's principles

Do you have a source for that?

Re: Cruller: Bun's Zig Runtime, Continued on Zig 0.16

#43

Post by dlahoda »

make3 wrote: post #24
aureate wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed it's surprising, given the zig compiler famously causes all developers who use it to merge into a single organism with a combined nervous system.

The Zirgs they call them (I'm kidding)

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/zirgs

Re: Cruller: Bun's Zig Runtime, Continued on Zig 0.16

#44

Post by actionfromafar »

Skywalker13 wrote: post #37

I don't understand why the git history has been pruned in this fork. According to the first commit in this fork: > Squashed as a single orphan commit — the original oven-sh/bun history isn't relevant to this stripped fork and its shallow clone doesn't push cleanly to a fresh remote. IMHO it's always a bad decision to do that. Here, all commit authors are lost. The original history is always relevant.

If I'm taking a project in a completely different direction, with different people, I might not care about commit history very much. But I worry more from a licensing standpoint. Unless a project has a strict copyright re-assignment policy (uncommon) where all contributors sign over their copyright (not just contribute their "patch" under the designated license), the copyrYight history is lost or at best muddled.

Now, in practical terms, one can always go back to the original repo and find it. But if I was doing this in a corporate $DAYJOB, I'd keep the history just to be sure.

Re: Cruller: Bun's Zig Runtime, Continued on Zig 0.16

#45

Post by jeltz »

Skywalker13 wrote: post #37

I don't understand why the git history has been pruned in this fork. According to the first commit in this fork: > Squashed as a single orphan commit — the original oven-sh/bun history isn't relevant to this stripped fork and its shallow clone doesn't push cleanly to a fresh remote. IMHO it's always a bad decision to do that. Here, all commit authors are lost. The original history is always relevant.

Yeah, and of they want to only keep history for the subset thet are interested in there is always git filter-branch.

Re: Cruller: Bun's Zig Runtime, Continued on Zig 0.16

#46

Post by jeltz »

actionfromafar wrote: post #44
Skywalker13 wrote: post #37

I don't understand why the git history has been pruned in this fork. According to the first commit in this fork: > Squashed as a single orphan commit — the original oven-sh/bun history isn't relevant to this stripped fork and its shallow clone doesn't push cleanly to a fresh remote. IMHO it's always a bad decision to do that. Here, all commit authors are lost. The original history is always relevant.

If I'm taking a project in a completely different direction, with different people, I might not care about commit history very much. But I worry more from a licensing standpoint. Unless a project has a strict copyright re-assignment policy (uncommon) where all contributors sign over their copyright (not just contribute their "patch" under the designated license), the copyrYight history is lost or at best muddled. Now…

I still would want the history easy to reach because when I find weird code I almost always reach directly to git log.

Re: Cruller: Bun's Zig Runtime, Continued on Zig 0.16

#48

Post by sevenzero »

Skywalker13 wrote: post #37

I don't understand why the git history has been pruned in this fork. According to the first commit in this fork: > Squashed as a single orphan commit — the original oven-sh/bun history isn't relevant to this stripped fork and its shallow clone doesn't push cleanly to a fresh remote. IMHO it's always a bad decision to do that. Here, all commit authors are lost. The original history is always relevant.

How is the history relevant? Honest question. 5 years in the field I never had a reason to check out the git history of any project I ever worked on.

Re: Cruller: Bun's Zig Runtime, Continued on Zig 0.16

#49

Post by cpuguy83 »

sevenzero wrote: post #48
Skywalker13 wrote: post #37

I don't understand why the git history has been pruned in this fork. According to the first commit in this fork: > Squashed as a single orphan commit — the original oven-sh/bun history isn't relevant to this stripped fork and its shallow clone doesn't push cleanly to a fresh remote. IMHO it's always a bad decision to do that. Here, all commit authors are lost. The original history is always relevant.

How is the history relevant? Honest question. 5 years in the field I never had a reason to check out the git history of any project I ever worked on.

Bug is uncovered. Where was it first introduced? Why was the code changed? What did it do before the bug was introduced?

Re: Cruller: Bun's Zig Runtime, Continued on Zig 0.16

#50

Post by sevenzero »

cpuguy83 wrote: post #49
sevenzero wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is the history relevant? Honest question. 5 years in the field I never had a reason to check out the git history of any project I ever worked on.

Bug is uncovered. Where was it first introduced? Why was the code changed? What did it do before the bug was introduced?

Why would that matter if a bug is uncovered? If you know there's a bug just fix it? Like what use does the bugs history have?
Post reply on HN