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

Bun 1.4

bun.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 198 posts

Re: Bun 1.4

#51

Post by duped »

preommr wrote: post #12
cube00 wrote: post #3

It's weird their promotional video repeats "you can do without installing dependencies", if I want headless browser testing is that wrong to install a project that offers that? Why would I want everything reimplemented in this massive binary? Why would Bun be anymore in touch with nuances of all these different technologies then individual projects dedicated to their own speciality? JS Runtime, Package Manager, Test…

> Why would I want everything reimplemented in this massive binary? Why would Bun be anymore in touch with nuances of all these different technologies then individual projects dedicated to their own speciality? It's funny because the top article on HN is about a malicious rust crate package, and people keep making comparisons to js/npm and how both language suffer from frequent security issues because they have weak…

Something that frustrates me about that discourse is that people argue about the mere existence of dependencies but all 'supply chain' (1) attacks are issues over when dependencies change. Dynamic systems are harder to reason about than static ones.

(1) scare quotes because I think it's dumb for us software people to call code we picked up on the side of the road part of a 'supply chain' like that means anything.

Re: Bun 1.4

#52

Post by tumdum_ »

meetpateltech wrote: post #47
tumdum_ wrote: post #33

I wonder what was total token cost of the rewrite.

From the Rewriting Bun in Rust blog post: 5.9B uncached input tokens, 690M output tokens, 72B cached reads, came out to ~$165k at API pricing.

That was the initial work, but since then there was lots of work performed with LLMs.

Re: Bun 1.4

#53

Post by slowpoke-tail »

For me, notably absent from the release changelog and accompanying YouTube video they were excited to trumpet in the blog back in July, and the claim (still) this took 11 days. It's August 20th.

Re: Bun 1.4

#54

Post by nozzlegear »

optionalsquid wrote: post #7
Jcampuzano2 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its strange how flip floppy the JS ecosystem is, because go back literally 1-3 years or so and the BIGGEST complaint was the lack of a standard library and having to use a package for everything. But now that Bun is actually doing it its somehow bad? Its also still open source, so those implementations you mention need dedicated teams can still get the attention they need by the community if needed. I'm on the side t…

Is that flip-flopping or just different developers having different preferences? Those who complain now would have had no reason to complain back then, and vice versa

Also known as the Goomba fallacy:

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

Re: Bun 1.4

#56

Post by jjice »

sunsetSamurai wrote: post #11

I recently pivoted to Rust for the backend development, after getting tired of the nodejs ecosystem fragmentation and how fragile things feel. Bun seems very interesting since it allows you to do so many things without pulling in 3rd party libraries and bundlers? Is anybody using it instead of nodejs? how's the experience so far? I might have to give it a try. Yes, I know there's probably better options than Rust for…

The most appealing thing of Go to me is the good batteries including tooling. I don't use it much outside of little personal projects where I really don't want to deal with dependencies and want a small binary.

Re: Bun 1.4

#57

Post by DanielHB »

andai wrote: post #23
preommr wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why would I want everything reimplemented in this massive binary? Why would Bun be anymore in touch with nuances of all these different technologies then individual projects dedicated to their own speciality? It's funny because the top article on HN is about a malicious rust crate package, and people keep making comparisons to js/npm and how both language suffer from frequent security issues because they have weak…

I saw a post recently about how LLMs are much more effective in Ruby on Rails because it's batteries included, so you don't get so many implementation details crapping up the context window. I assume the same benefit applies to humans as well!

I am not into the Ruby on Rails world, but I find LLMs much more effective with powerful type systems like Typescript. Especially if you nudge it to keep things strict and (statically) eliminate invalid states. Do they use similar systems (build-time typing) for Ruby?

When the LLM can verify its own output by running static analysis they produce better results. They also seem to understand type definitions and avoid going to the source which, in theory, should reduce context size.

Re: Bun 1.4

#58

Post by ryankuykendall »

cube00 wrote: post #3

It's weird their promotional video repeats "you can do without installing dependencies", if I want headless browser testing is that wrong to install a project that offers that? Why would I want everything reimplemented in this massive binary? Why would Bun be anymore in touch with nuances of all these different technologies then individual projects dedicated to their own speciality? JS Runtime, Package Manager, Test…

“ Why would I want everything reimplemented in this massive binary? “

This isn’t about what individual developers would want but what is most beneficial to Anthropic and claude code. They are likely using Bun as a vehicle for standardizing and enriching local user environments in order to address common tasks that claude generally writes bespoke scripts to accomplish.

Re: Bun 1.4

#59

Post by panzi »

cube00 wrote: post #3

It's weird their promotional video repeats "you can do without installing dependencies", if I want headless browser testing is that wrong to install a project that offers that? Why would I want everything reimplemented in this massive binary? Why would Bun be anymore in touch with nuances of all these different technologies then individual projects dedicated to their own speciality? JS Runtime, Package Manager, Test…

Out of the things you mentioned I think the following make totally sense to be included in a language runtime like this:

JavaScript runtime (obviously), package manager, test runner for unit tests, bundler, JSX, SQLite bindings, formatter, linter, YAML and TOML parsers. Maaaaybe even a Markdown parser and HTML5 parser. Definitely JSON, CSV and XML parsers.

I.e. similar to Python. Though Python is a bit of an incoherent mess. If you have all these you need them to be coherent.

Re: Bun 1.4

#60

Post by aurareturn »

jaredcwhite wrote: post #46
aurareturn wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't so much about Bun or Node.js any more. It is the battleground for AI and non-AI coding. There is no non-AI coding anymore. I guarantee you Node.js team is heavily using AI to make changes and debug.

No non-AI coding anymore? I think not. https://handcraftedcode.org

Some people still make crafts by hand.
Post reply on HN