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

Bun Rust rewrite: "codebase fails basic miri checks, allows for UB in safe rust"

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 366 posts

Re: Bun Rust rewrite: "codebase fails basic miri checks, allows for UB in safe rust"

#101

Post by applfanboysbgon »

whimsicalism wrote: post #58
NooneAtAll3 wrote: post #48

So Bun saga has been "Zig, let me Ai you" "no" *Ai's Zig fork, suffers from memory bugs* "Well I'm moving!" *Ai's code into Rust, suffers from memory bugs*

Sure. I'm completely unaffiliated and think Zig's AI stance is ridiculous & politically-motivated and a port is absolutely justified if they will not budge. Apparently I am deeply in the minority.

Zig rejected Bun's proposed contribution because it was a bad contribution, which they explained at length. Zig should not be made to "budge" on bad contributions. It seems you think Zig is unreasonable for rejecting bad code that happens to also be AI-generated, but believe it's reasonable for a project to be forced to accept bad code because it is AI?

Re: Bun Rust rewrite: "codebase fails basic miri checks, allows for UB in safe rust"

#102

Post by npodbielski »

whateveracct wrote: post #73
fastball wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, and seems pretty clear you can now backpressure the rewrite with tools like miri to have Claude Code automatically improve it.

[flagged]

Hey... I like coding! Does it mean I am not an engineer?

Re: Bun Rust rewrite: "codebase fails basic miri checks, allows for UB in safe rust"

#103

Post by Henchman21 »

Anon1096 wrote: post #66
parchley wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The author kept bragging about classes of bugs that would not happen with Rust.

A bug-for-bug port to Rust is the first step to fixing that. Assuming the port is actually 1:1 without any behavioral changes, these bugs already exist in the Zig code. The difference is now it's known where effort can be dedicated in order to one day have a memory-safe release of Bun. People have absolutely lost their mind over this and completely forgotten the benefits Rust gives you. I feel like I've gone back 10…

Its almost like AI is rotting our brains?

Re: Bun Rust rewrite: "codebase fails basic miri checks, allows for UB in safe rust"

#104

Post by repelsteeltje »

aw1621107 wrote: post #72
repelsteeltje wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sure there have been attempts at defining a language that has no UB, but afaik all meaningful languages have UB in some dark corner or enumerated explicitly. For example, Java thread execution order is UB.

> For example, Java thread execution order is UB. In this context "UB" means something different than how you're using it. The UB being mentioned here is the "nasal demons" form, i.e., programs which contain undefined behavior have no defined meaning according to the language semantics. What you're talking about is probably better described in this context as "unspecified behavior", which is behavior that the languag…

Great example.

So this "unspecified behavior" might turn into the more nasal demon type when g(), h() and i() share mutable state and assume some particular sequential order of execution. No?

Re: Bun Rust rewrite: "codebase fails basic miri checks, allows for UB in safe rust"

#105

Post by recitedropper »

pavel_lishin wrote: post #46
applfanboysbgon wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

I'm not sure that HN is that influential that buying up a few accounts would matter. To what end?

HN is enormously influential for programmers and employees within the tech industry. Who happen to be exactly who Anthropic, and other AI companies, desperately need adoption from...

Re: Bun Rust rewrite: "codebase fails basic miri checks, allows for UB in safe rust"

#106

Post by scuff3d »

kibwen wrote: post #24
dangerlibrary wrote: post #2

There's a book that changed a lot of the way I think about attention and media [0]. The book isn't very good, but it flags something relevant here. There is a huge asymmetry between the reach of a big, flashy announcement (here: bun was re-written in memory-safe rust in a couple weeks), and the relatively small reach of a correction (often just a footnote on an old article, here a GH issue). This asymmetry is well un…

> a big, flashy announcement (here: bun was re-written in memory-safe rust in a couple weeks) Did they even claim it was "memory-safe"? Every discussion of this topic has had dozens of comments noting that their vibed codebase is bursting at the seams with unaudited unsafe blocks, lightly reviewed by people who seem to not only seem to not understand Rust, but who seem incensed at the idea of needing to understand an…

[dead]

Re: Bun Rust rewrite: "codebase fails basic miri checks, allows for UB in safe rust"

#107

Post by CamouflagedKiwi »

kibwen wrote: post #24
dangerlibrary wrote: post #2

There's a book that changed a lot of the way I think about attention and media [0]. The book isn't very good, but it flags something relevant here. There is a huge asymmetry between the reach of a big, flashy announcement (here: bun was re-written in memory-safe rust in a couple weeks), and the relatively small reach of a correction (often just a footnote on an old article, here a GH issue). This asymmetry is well un…

> a big, flashy announcement (here: bun was re-written in memory-safe rust in a couple weeks) Did they even claim it was "memory-safe"? Every discussion of this topic has had dozens of comments noting that their vibed codebase is bursting at the seams with unaudited unsafe blocks, lightly reviewed by people who seem to not only seem to not understand Rust, but who seem incensed at the idea of needing to understand an…

They didn't have to. There's a widely held assumption that Rust == safe, or safer than anything else.

Re: Bun Rust rewrite: "codebase fails basic miri checks, allows for UB in safe rust"

#109

Post by tapirl »

mohsen1 wrote: post #67

I was a little shocked that they could get it fully working in a week to be honest. My side project is a very similar ambition ( https://tsz.dev ) but I am in no way claiming success. i keep adding more and more tests to ensure things works. Even after all of TypeScript's own tests pass I am finding bugs which I was totally expecting. The bar for matching tsc's behavior is really _really_ high. see: https://github.co…

Are there any evidences which prove the process was done in a week?

Re: Bun Rust rewrite: "codebase fails basic miri checks, allows for UB in safe rust"

#110

Post by swiftcoder »

Animats wrote: post #70
smasher164 wrote: post #60

What I don't understand is if they were going to translate Zig to unsafe Rust, why not just build a translation tool for it? You could do a one-to-one mapping of language constructs, hardcoding patterns in your codebase, and as one friend put it "Tbh they could've just hooked up zig translate-c to c2rust". They would get deterministic translation, would probably have not been a heavy investment to build, and the outp…

> "Tbh they could've just hooked up zig translate-c to c2rust". Have you ever seen what comes out of c2rust? It's awful. It relies on a library of functions which emulate unsafe C pointer semantics with unsafe Rust. A few years ago, when I was struggling with bugs in OpenJPEG (a JPEG 2000 decoder), someone tried running it through c2rust. The converted unsafe rust segfaulted at the same place the C code did. It's com…

> The converted unsafe rust segfaulted at the same place the C code did. It's compatible, but not safe

That is indeed the point of c2rust. It gives you a baseline that is semantically identical to the original codebase, and with that passing the full test suite, bug-for-bug, you can then start gradually adopting rusty idioms to improve the memory safety of the codebase.

Post reply on HN