Earlier quoted context omitted.
I can’t find the tweet right now but I follow the developer on twitter and his rationale was essentially that he wanted to focus on nailing single core speeds before expanding to multi core. I assume this has to do with how extremely experimental bun is at the moment anyway. So they are focusing on nailing the fundamentals before attempting anything that would make it „production ready“ such as multi core support.
Ah yeah in the submitted article they say the updated benchmark used “ latest Bun…” - so does that mean that it was just tested using a released version (lacking multithreading) instead of a nightly build (with recently added multithreading)? As an aside, I’ve now seen a couple of HN submissions relating to Bun and there’s been a vibe that there’s conspiracy or foul play afoot in each. That’s a little … unusual. What…
That's inevitable when companies with big investments have to market a performance-oriented product to a public that doesn't fully understand the nuance of software performance running on modern hardware.
The average JS dev doesn't really know what's happening behind the scenes, so a precise message will not be nearly as effective as slapping together a long and a short bar in a barchart. And since this type of marketing is imprecise by nature, tweaking some details lets opposing parties corroborate conflicting claims.
I've been through this same phenomenon when working at Redis Labs. Everybody had the fastest cache and/or db. Both Redis Labs and each of its competitors. You just had to pick the right bar chart.