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

Bun 1.4 Rust rewrite is not looking good?

tipiirai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 153 posts

Re: Bun 1.4 Rust rewrite is not looking good?

#31

Post by aureate »

dvt wrote: post #12
tipiirai wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

First of all, I'd need to see a diff on that. It's insane to make that kind of claim without backing it up. Second of all, dead code (as in truly dead code: like an if statement that is guaranteed to never be true), is optimized away by the compiler. So even if we had all this dead code, it is not an issue that would ever impact the final product. Third of all, the Bun runtime consists of over a million lines of code…

> It's insane to make that kind of claim without backing it up.

A bizarre accusation. It's a fork of Bun that says they removed the dead code. All you have to do to see the diffs is look at its history. Most of the commits are code removal.

It's a fork of Zig bun, though, not Rust, so hardly relevant to the AI argument.

Re: Bun 1.4 Rust rewrite is not looking good?

#32

Post by franciscop »

domh wrote: post #15
rao-v wrote: post #3

What 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

Node.js is virtually the only platform not supporting the Fetchable convention:

https://github.com/nodejs/node/issues/63096

https://fetchable.org/

Re: Bun 1.4 Rust rewrite is not looking good?

#33

Post by jtrn »

This reads like one of thouse articles in mainstream media where the author has a obvious agenda, and they think they are really clever when they write an attack piece that they think looks like objective , when it really really transparently isent.

Re: Bun 1.4 Rust rewrite is not looking good?

#34

Post by jibal »

joshuat wrote: post #11

This reads as another weirdly personal attack against Jarred for slighting a technology stack the author prefers, citing the even weirder personal attack against Jarred written by Andrew Kelley as the sole source to justify their "biggest worry", code quality. Idk why people have become so invested in this.

The OP says

> 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

When in fact Buz is a fork of the pre-Rust Zig version of Bun.

The OP has no credibility.

Re: Bun 1.4 Rust rewrite is not looking good?

#35

Post by stpedgwdgfhgdd »

jemiluv8 wrote: post #16

Yet another clickbait making outrageous assertions. Fwiw I don’t think anyone’s reputation is on the line and so far, you’ve offered only anecdotal evidence at best. Things like this should be backed by stats and community surveys and a whole lot more. I didn’t see anything about number of downloads or any of the usual metrics used to judge software these days Your whole scientific endeavor in this seemed to thrive o…

The article is about the upcoming 1.4 release.

The article lists various promised release dates, are they incorrect?

Re: Bun 1.4 Rust rewrite is not looking good?

#36

Post by tipiirai »

rienbdj wrote: post #17
rao-v wrote: post #3

What is the right recommendation at this point for a Node alternative? Deno?

What’s wrong with node? Genuine question

Nothing. Bun is just smaller and faster and comes with a built-in package manager, test runner, bundler, SQL engine, image processor etc..

Re: Bun 1.4 Rust rewrite is not looking good?

#38

Post by kwhat4 »

rienbdj wrote: post #17
rao-v wrote: post #3

What is the right recommendation at this point for a Node alternative? Deno?

What’s wrong with node? Genuine question

From the perspective of someone trying to package nodejs, building it is a complete dumpster fire. GYP (generate your projects) is a now defunct and poorly thought out build tool that node heavily relies on with it's native C/C++ modules. Cross compiling is completely broken and I am honestly surprised it builds reliability for the native target.

Re: Bun 1.4 Rust rewrite is not looking good?

#39

Post by unified101 »

jibal wrote: post #29
verdverm wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Flag the article and move on.

Re: Bun 1.4 Rust rewrite is not looking good?

#40

Post by locknitpicker »

dvt wrote: post #30
frail_figure wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 Hope that helps.

> What are you talking about?

I think GP was pointing out how bun's release cadence stalled and the project is going nowhere at the moment.

https://github.com/oven-sh/bun/releases

The project was pretty healthy up to 1.13.14, but since may they stopped shipping anything.

That's quite odd for a project that just went through a major rewrite and is lauded as being developed primarily by LLM coding assistants.

Personally I expected the release cadence was going to go through the roof, but instead it flat lined.

Post reply on HN