221–230 of 822 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd be surprised if they could eliminate memory issues completely, especially considering the amount of `unsafe` the codebase seems to contain. git rev-parse HEAD && ag "unsafe" src | wc -l 19d8ade2c6c1f0eeae50bd9d7f2a4bf4a2551557 14865
Doesn't that count anything that has 'unsafe' in it, not just the keyword?
Still writing the blog post about this. Will share more details. For where this is coming from, skim the bugfixes in the Bun v1.3.14 and earlier release notes. Rust won’t catch all of these - leaks from holding references too long and anything that re-enters across the JS boundary are still on us. But a large % of that list is use-after-free, double-free, and forgot-to-free-on-error-path, which become compile errors…
Looking forward to the blog post. Do you plan to run both the Zig and Rust binaries side-by-side across a wide range of real applications (potentially shadowing in production) to weed out bugs?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're not alone in voicing this, another (now dead) comment did it earlier too with a bit more of an emotional response ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48134229 ). Still, do you folks never do something to see how you feel about something, then chose to go one way or another? I'm not sure why it's so hard to see that it was an overreaction at the time, because it was an experiment, then at one point it stoppe…
Yes sure it's ok to change your mind. But don't you think the people Jarred accused of "overreacting" in retrospect didn't?
Love seeing the tests themselves getting modified, with random `sleep(1)` thrown around in a few of them. This bodes well, I pray some idiot at some large AI co actually ends up using this garbage in prod
Claude Code uses Bun as its runtime. If this has been merged, I expect that Bun-rust is good enough to power Anthropic's internal agents to do live testing.
Turns out "its just an experiment, you all are overreacting" was just a lie to damp criticism. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48019226
Or do those protections only cover whiny open source developers upset about a chat bot writing blogs?
I'm actually excited for somebody trying experimenting with automated translation, but I'm afraid this will be lots of backwards compatibility issues. I started looking at the commits, and it's basically solving the ,,tests not pass'' problem by changing the tests themselves. The real work of making it working on programs that are already deployed will be just starting now. The only silver lining I see is that the se…
The whole idea that my RUNTIME contains code that a single human hasn't looked at does make me uncomfortable, but if this actually works without a ton of issues it's pretty remarkable.
So the geniuses in the datacenter prefer to rewrite the full codebase in another language instead of maintaining and improving its own fork or contributing to make the current language better. Impressive to rewrite 1MLOC in a week yes, but this is more of a job of a million monkey programmers crammed in a datacenter than a bunch geniuses. And I would know, since I'm a monkey programmer who is in danger now... Or mayb…
> or contributing to make the current language better The people making Zig have said they don't want that.
> Code origin was not even a factor [0]
> AI is entirely besides the point here. The changes in this Zig fork are not desirable to upstream for several reasons. [1]
So my view here is that besides AI policies to filter low value contributions and "contributor poker" [2] to attract contributors vs just contributions, a well thought of genious implementation aligned with the Zig roadmap instead of the "hacky implementation for a flashy headline" [1] would have made the cut.
But then again this entertaining drama will sadly get deprecated by mid 2027 as the datacenters will be churning out their own opusrust and clankzig.
[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48017255
[1] https://ziggit.dev/t/bun-s-zig-fork-got-4x-faster-compilatio...
Turns out "its just an experiment, you all are overreacting" was just a lie to damp criticism. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48019226
Merging a complete rewrite in another language in 9 days seems insane to me. Maybe I'm just too cautious but with something like this I'd split off as a separate binary and get some heavy use customers involved as testers first to see if it causes any unforeseen problems before slowly expanding it out. I'd want to be pretty damn confident it won't cause any regressions before sunsetting the original codebase in favor…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The whole idea that my RUNTIME contains code that a single human hasn't looked at does make me uncomfortable, but if this actually works without a ton of issues it's pretty remarkable.
Don't worry, no one reviewed open source code before AI either. Basically nothing changed about the trust model.