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

111–120 of 153 posts

Re: Bun 1.4 Rust rewrite is not looking good?

#111

Post by owebmaster »

vga1 wrote: post #92
dafelst wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is yet to be determined whether or not the bun rewrite is a success, though.

What are the standards for determining that? The most obvious benefit Rust can give them is being safe from memory leaks. This is hardly controversial: it has been a Zig design choice that memory leaks are the developer/user's responsibility. They have already demonstrated to have fixed several of those [0]. Marketing-wise, it has been an obvious success. Dunno if that matters. [0] https://bun.com/blog/bun-in-rust

> Marketing-wise, it has been an obvious success. Dunno if that matters.

What's interesting tho it's that it can go from apparent marketing success to a big failure as the release keeps getting postponed.

Re: Bun 1.4 Rust rewrite is not looking good?

#112

Post by hn_submit »

I'm quietly hoping it fails. This will once and for all silence all those paid-shills that are calling out that A.I. will replace all software developers.

It may also lead to the A.I. musical chairs game stopping and a multi-trillion dollar collapse of the stock-market and, most likely, the financial system. Hopefully we'll be able to buy DRAM and other stuff that uses it cheaply again.

I mean there's so much cruft on the internet about people talking how revolutionary these code generators are and that they fixed 5 years worth of technical debt in 2 months etc. etc. Considering the multi-trillion dollars involved I don't believe we can trust anything we read anymore. Many of these proponents are nothing but paid shills.

Re: Bun 1.4 Rust rewrite is not looking good?

#113

Post by hn_submit »

aypineau wrote: post #97

I'm really skeptical about this rewrite I chose to adopt bun about a year ago, and I've honestly lost count of the number of issues i've submitted and the amount of time i've wasted dealing with them. If I had to make the choice again, I would probably stick with node and pnpm for serious projects We're constantly being sold on promises of -XX% ram usage, but in practice, it's often builds randomly failing for no app…

There's a lot riding on this. If the Bun rewrite fails it could lead to the U.S. and global financial system collapsing. Yes, incredible, but true.

Re: Bun 1.4 Rust rewrite is not looking good?

#114

Post by hn_submit »

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.

Jarred has probably already sold his company for big $$$ and is set up for life whether the Bun rewrite succeeds or not.

We will, however, be left to scour the ruins of the financial devastation if this goes sour.

Re: Bun 1.4 Rust rewrite is not looking good?

#115

Post by hiccuphippo »

ksec wrote: post #108
dvt wrote: post #4

> 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…

All that sounds great. The promised of shipping for months that never came is a concern, comparatively speaking to history of the project and what is happening. But if we have user feedback suggest otherwise may be it is good. For most, they are still waiting for official release so they could make their own judgment, the problem is that it is still not released. I guess we should just wait a little longer.

I say let them cook. Rushed software is not good, neither for the user nor the developers. I say the same for Zig 1.0

What I'd like to see in the meantime is what are the biggest blockers to the release. Maybe Bun has a milestone list somewhere, I couldn't find it.

Re: Bun 1.4 Rust rewrite is not looking good?

#116

Post by orf »

dgellow wrote: post #101
orf wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty simple: it shipped to the owner.

Aka: internal beta

Claude code is for sure the most widely used bun application. So the majority of bun users are using it.

That’s not what I’d call an internal beta?

Re: Bun 1.4 Rust rewrite is not looking good?

#117

Post by dgellow »

orf wrote: post #116
dgellow wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aka: internal beta

Claude code is for sure the most widely used bun application. So the majority of bun users are using it. That’s not what I’d call an internal beta?

Sure but that’s how you beta test a runtime, by using it in a codebase you control. Claude is publicly released and used widely, that’s still only a single codebase

Re: Bun 1.4 Rust rewrite is not looking good?

#118

Post by andsoitis »

owebmaster wrote: post #110
aypineau wrote: post #97

I'm really skeptical about this rewrite I chose to adopt bun about a year ago, and I've honestly lost count of the number of issues i've submitted and the amount of time i've wasted dealing with them. If I had to make the choice again, I would probably stick with node and pnpm for serious projects We're constantly being sold on promises of -XX% ram usage, but in practice, it's often builds randomly failing for no app…

> But I still strongly believe the project makes a lot of sense, and I genuinely think these issues can be solved by 2028, if the project keeps its focus on stability instead of another SDK for SQL, web sockets, image compression, or whatever comes next If you check the maintainer X, he's asking Claude for what features to implement next. Not only stabilizing isn't the priority, even the features implemented are rand…

> If you check the maintainer X, he's asking Claude for what features to implement next.

Link?

Re: Bun 1.4 Rust rewrite is not looking good?

#119

Post by tipiirai »

andsoitis wrote: post #118
owebmaster wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But I still strongly believe the project makes a lot of sense, and I genuinely think these issues can be solved by 2028, if the project keeps its focus on stability instead of another SDK for SQL, web sockets, image compression, or whatever comes next If you check the maintainer X, he's asking Claude for what features to implement next. Not only stabilizing isn't the priority, even the features implemented are rand…

> If you check the maintainer X, he's asking Claude for what features to implement next. Link?

> Link?

https://xcancel.com/jarredsumner/status/2089183223024943505

Post reply on HN