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

Bun v1.3.9

bun.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 54 posts

Re: Bun v1.3.9

#21

Post by embedding-shape »

spankalee wrote: post #17

Parallel and sequential, especially at the command level, are really the wrong abstractions for running scripts. If you have multiple packages, each with builds, there's a high chance you have dependencies and multiple packages depending on common ones. What you really want is a way for scripts to describe their dependencies, and then the runner figures out what order to run them in, and cache scripts that don't need…

> What you really want is a way for scripts to describe their dependencies, and then the runner figures out what order to run them in, and cache scripts that don't need to be run because their inputs didn't change.

DAG + content-addressing, final binary being the target and everything resolved from there. We could have some beautiful build system that just works and is fast, but seems it never magically appears by itself although it seems so elegant. Guess Nix/NixOS is the closest we've gotten so far, works well enough, missing concurrency and parallelism though.

Re: Bun v1.3.9

#22

Post by hinkley »

giorgioz wrote: post #2

Is it more common in English to use there terms Parallel and Sequential or Parallel and Series ? Made a React Library to generate video as code and named two components I was wondering if those were two best terms two use...

Sequential is a fuzzier word. It can imply that a series of steps feeds output from step A into step B and so on. But at the same time it can also drift into areas typically defined as linearization. Where a task runs in parallel but applies in series, in sequence.

Re: Bun v1.3.9

#24

Post by dpe82 »

embedding-shape wrote: post #21
spankalee wrote: post #17

Parallel and sequential, especially at the command level, are really the wrong abstractions for running scripts. If you have multiple packages, each with builds, there's a high chance you have dependencies and multiple packages depending on common ones. What you really want is a way for scripts to describe their dependencies, and then the runner figures out what order to run them in, and cache scripts that don't need…

> What you really want is a way for scripts to describe their dependencies, and then the runner figures out what order to run them in, and cache scripts that don't need to be run because their inputs didn't change. DAG + content-addressing, final binary being the target and everything resolved from there. We could have some beautiful build system that just works and is fast, but seems it never magically appears by it…

Google's build system Bazel is what you describe.

Re: Bun v1.3.9

#27

Post by wrs »

giorgioz wrote: post #2

Is it more common in English to use there terms Parallel and Sequential or Parallel and Series ? Made a React Library to generate video as code and named two components I was wondering if those were two best terms two use...

The electronics terms parallel and series are about static physical connections (things are connected in parallel or series — the more grammatical form would be in a series).

The software terms parallel and sequential are about the temporal relationship of activities (things are done in parallel or sequentially). That’s why in software we also have the term “concurrent” which means something different from “parallel”.

Re: Bun v1.3.9

#28

Post by oj-hn-dot-com »

Well, that speeds things up a lot. But I agree with spankalee, it should be a DAG.

   "ci": "CI=true bun run --parallel check test build docs && bun run --parallel zip zip:firefox"

Re: Bun v1.3.9

#30

Post by dmit »

dude250711 wrote: post #23

Why does Anthropic even need Bun? Is Claude not good enough to write something far superior very fast?

Think you answered your second question with your first.
Post reply on HN