[deleted]
Bun 1.4 Rust rewrite is not looking good?
21–30 of 153 posts
Re: Bun 1.4 Rust rewrite is not looking good?
#22Bun has been nothing but amazing wins for me, and I really like what it enabled me to do. Two examples:
- I have a couple of projects that handle images. I was including Sharp, but since these are side projects in a small VM, often a redeploy that recompiled Sharp just crashed the full VM (out of memory). Bun includes Bun.Image[1] natively, which is built around Sharp's API, so swapping Sharp out was very easy, and now deploys are a breeze (and swapping it in would be just as easy).
- Bun's JSX support is a godsend. I've replaced almost all my side projects that were backend rendered from Pug, Handlebars, and other various templates I used to have to just pure JSX. Heck, this made it trivial to make a side projects where the Favicon was a dynamic SVG [2]
[1] https://bun.com/docs/runtime/image
[2] https://stocksreader.com/portfolio?%5Egspc=10&amzn=10&msft=1...
Re: Bun 1.4 Rust rewrite is not looking good?
#23Re: Bun 1.4 Rust rewrite is not looking good?
#24> The last three months have not looked good for Bun. Apart from pro-AI or anti-AI posturing how have the last few months not looked good for Bun, exactly? I use it daily and I've seen basically zero regressions. I get it, you don't like AI or you like Zig over Rust, or whatever. I just haven't seen any serious argument that Bun has somehow become worse software. > The project has over 5k open pull requests, which is…
> how have the last few months not looked good for Bun, exactly? The article answers this. hint: they're not shipping. > I get it, you don't like AI or you like Zig over Rust, or whatever The article doesn't argue for either of these. hint: it's arguing that the team is not shipping. > Terrible argument, and not really an argument at all. It's an argument for the devs not shipping > I agree, so look at the code and p…
> The article answers this. hint: they're not shipping.
They're shipping though.
Claude Code and many others use it. There's just not been a "public" release.
Re: Bun 1.4 Rust rewrite is not looking good?
#25Bun has been nothing but amazing wins for me, and I really like what it enabled me to do. Two examples: - I have a couple of projects that handle images. I was including Sharp, but since these are side projects in a small VM, often a redeploy that recompiled Sharp just crashed the full VM (out of memory). Bun includes Bun.Image[1] natively, which is built around Sharp's API, so swapping Sharp out was very easy, and n…
I also use Bun.Image to collect image size and metadata, and also to generate low-quality image placeholders. Works great.
Have you tried 1.4?
Re: Bun 1.4 Rust rewrite is not looking good?
#26What is the right recommendation at this point for a Node alternative? Deno?
What's wrong with just using Node? It's stable, has a good (and growing) standard library and has enough backing to be self sustaining. edit: There's also nub which is built on top of Node.js and removes some rough/legacy edges: https://github.com/nubjs/nub
It consolidates a lot of really annoying nits and quality of life aspects like bundling, module resolution, testing, env handling, etc. Node is just the runtime and still would require libs like esbuild, jest/vitest, dotenv, and so on. It's genuinely nice to have those out of the box, and generally in Bun the performance is quite significantly better in places that matter.
Re: Bun 1.4 Rust rewrite is not looking good?
#27> The last three months have not looked good for Bun. Apart from pro-AI or anti-AI posturing how have the last few months not looked good for Bun, exactly? I use it daily and I've seen basically zero regressions. I get it, you don't like AI or you like Zig over Rust, or whatever. I just haven't seen any serious argument that Bun has somehow become worse software. > The project has over 5k open pull requests, which is…
Unused code is one issue. A project called Buz[1] found over 11,000 lines of dead code from the Rust port. [1]: https://github.com/jazzzooo/buz
Congrats on completely undermining your own argument and credibility. Did you not even read your link?
> Buz is an early-stage experimental fork of pre-Rust Bun.... Over 11,000 lines of dead code removed from upstream Bun.
Re: Bun 1.4 Rust rewrite is not looking good?
#28I'm still waiting for someone to bring forth some reproducible stats and state something along the lines of "I did a comparison of Bun 1.3 vs 1.4, and found these user-affecting issues in the latter which are not in the former".
Re: Bun 1.4 Rust rewrite is not looking good?
#29Earlier quoted context omitted.
11k out of a million. I wish I had a project under 1% of "dead code".
there are linters that check for dead code (depending on your language / ecosystem), it should always be 0%
The dead code was removed from the pre-Rust Zig version. The OP has no credibility.
P.S. Nor does new user parenting my comments.
Re: Bun 1.4 Rust rewrite is not looking good?
#30> The last three months have not looked good for Bun. Apart from pro-AI or anti-AI posturing how have the last few months not looked good for Bun, exactly? I use it daily and I've seen basically zero regressions. I get it, you don't like AI or you like Zig over Rust, or whatever. I just haven't seen any serious argument that Bun has somehow become worse software. > The project has over 5k open pull requests, which is…
> how have the last few months not looked good for Bun, exactly? The article answers this. hint: they're not shipping. > I get it, you don't like AI or you like Zig over Rust, or whatever The article doesn't argue for either of these. hint: it's arguing that the team is not shipping. > Terrible argument, and not really an argument at all. It's an argument for the devs not shipping > I agree, so look at the code and p…
> It's not being shipped.
What are you talking about? I'm running 1.4 canary (the Rust rewrite) right now.
λ bun --version
1.4.0