401–410 of 412 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Then what the hell are Anthropic and OpenAI doing with all that money?
Building datacenters to run the machines for hundreds of millions of people. And Open AI/Anthropic aren't working with trillions in any case.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Then what the hell are Anthropic and OpenAI doing with all that money?
Building datacenters to run the machines for hundreds of millions of people. And Open AI/Anthropic aren't working with trillions in any case.
I can see CI battling pretty hard with rusts slow compile times but not sure that is particularly conclusive of anything when it comes to the success of the rewrite
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Building datacenters to run the machines for hundreds of millions of people. And Open AI/Anthropic aren't working with trillions in any case.
Sorry, billion dollar language machines. My bad on the number of zeroes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Building datacenters to run the machines for hundreds of millions of people. And Open AI/Anthropic aren't working with trillions in any case.
If they only had to run Mythos for one person, how much do we think that would've cost to train and develop?
Bun’s Rust rewrite shipped in Claude Code over a month ago and barely anyone noticed. Claude Code is widely used. The Rust rewrite is going well overall. In the Bun v1.4 video, I promised a certain number of newly passing Node.js tests were added to force us to improve compatibility, and that number is not true yet. The release is delayed until it is true. The PRs to make it true are up but not merged yet. Most likel…
Ok, so you've just admitted that you have deployed thousands of lines of likely non-human reviewed LLM generated code (Bun's rust rewrite) to millions of client machines (via the Claude Code app auto-update) with significant local client access credentials, in a relatively quick and rushed manner. What's stopping the LLM from having unscrupulously injected something nefarious into the codebase that you are unaware of…
I really do not understand how software developer think anymore. Using a LLM to translate a project in a short time, is by itself incredible. Just like one-shot whatever office clone. But what makes software is not the fast creation of a "product" but that actual development of its features. Figuring out how everything needs to work together, fixing the bugs, and the o so boring UI work. I have used LLMs to create st…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's the equivalent of porting Unreal Engine 5 to another language and then using it exclusively to run a 2D Tetris clone. Let's wait for the next Bun release when more real-world code is hammering it before declaring victory. (also, fwiw, a manual rewrite would be under the same scrunity and suffer from the same skepticism, at least when obviously rushed).
If you ported UE5 to, idfk, Malbolge and ran Tetris on it and someone would dismiss it as “not impressive”, I would think they lost the plot too!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Bun is a major part of the web ecosystem It was never that large but it did have a shot at getting more popular - until this drama. No one worth their salt is building on Bun anymore, the creators and maintainers of bun have demonstrated their complete lack of care around engineering and support. It’s just too risky.
I regularly use bun, it's a decisive speed improvement over node. Large parts of the ecosystem build on bun. If you install bun you're still getting the zig version. I don't see major reasons to doubt the rust rework, especially as so much capital and token investment is being thrown at it. As long as it fits better than alternatives, I see no major reasons to change.
> I don't see major reasons to doubt the rust rework, especially as so much capital and token investment is being thrown at it.
You shouldn't trust the rust rework. Despite the mountains of capital and token investment which have been thrown at it, they still only ship the zig version to users.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I link to Jarred's writeup on bun.com, where you'll note he mentions that its being used on Prisma and Claude Code. I don't agree that using something in a very specific environment is the same as a wide release. I trust readers will either know the backstory or read the articles I link to. Such is life if they don't.
Why are you resistant to adding a sentence to the article that notes that Claude Code uses the rewrite? Do you think it would weaken the article? When I said it would improve the credibility I did mean it. My instinct on reading the article this morning was "this person doesn't know that Claude Code runs on Bun, which weakens their credibility in presenting the argument they are making here."
It's not your article, bud. They have already addressed your concerns, and don't need to make changes just because you feel the article isn't "fair".
> My instinct on reading the article this morning was "this person doesn't know that Claude Code runs on Bun, which weakens their credibility in presenting the argument they are making here."
And your instinct was clearly mistaken. You should read the article more carefully before offering criticism.