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

251–260 of 366 posts

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

#251

Post by conradludgate »

skippyboxedhero wrote: post #227
jadar wrote: post #140

> Please consider not vibe coding rust as AIs are not good at writing Rust and also hire a real rust dev Isn't the whole point of AI companies using Rust that it's explicit, safe, and AIs are fairly good at writing it?

AI is not good at writing Rust. The ways in which it is bad vary from writing code that just looks off to actually not working. I do not use unsafe frequently so cannot comment on this particular scenario but I have seen similar stuff often, most Rust code that I read from AIs has at least one or two issues. In particular, if you have a situation that requires any kind of conceptual understanding then AI will likely…

I haven't experienced these issues with latest models writing performant and correct rust fwiw. It does seem to understand Rust's safety concepts quite well when working on reviewing or writing code

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

#252

Post by robbiewxyz »

simonreiff wrote: post #159

Holy cow: architector4@AGOGUS:/tmp$ git clone --depth=1 ' https://github.com/oven-sh/bun ' Cloning into 'bun'... … architector4@AGOGUS:/tmp$ cd bun/ architector4@AGOGUS:/tmp/bun$ find -type f -name '*.rs' -exec grep unsafe {} \; | grep -v '//' | wc -l 13255 ....Thirteen thousand two hundred and fifty five lines without comments with the word "unsafe" in them in Rust code files across this rewrite. This is so gross. I…

This's certainly a betrayal of their community.

But they got bought out. By the tech equivalent of private equity. Every community in the USA & in most of the world is aware what happens when the friendly neighborhood business you've supported & relied on sells.

This is an old & systemic capitalistic phenomenon more than it is anything specific to AI. Hopefully someday we can figure out a real solution.

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

#253

Post by bdangubic »

shimman wrote: post #219
bdangubic wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

engineering is worthless unless you can sell it

What a terribly anti-human sentiment to have.

rooted in a long 30+ year reality. you can engineer the greatest, most secure, most accessible, most ____ thing but if it doesn’t sell those amazeballs engineers will be talking to their recruiters…

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

#254

Post by wiseowise »

fwip wrote: post #209
wiseowise wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

* Spend God knows how many dollars in unlimited tokens to do the rewrite * Make a huge deal out of it how “Claude Code enabled Bun team to rewrite 1+ mil of Zig lines to Rust” and write a blogpost, VCs are salivating * Basic checks fail * Let Mythos rip the codebase to shreds, spend God knows how much more * Write a separate blogpost * Charlatans and smooth brains clap and defend against “delusional anti-AI mob” * VC…

And how is the Bun team supposed to work on a million lines of slop rust code?

Just like how they did the rewrite. It is not longer a small OSS team trying to survive in the world, it's a corporate entity with unlimited access to Anthropic resources. All the doomsayers who were prophesying that Bun will become sellout were right.

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

#255

Post by LexiMax »

pdimitar wrote: post #170
awesome_dude wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You've never seen the Rust evangelists? I am genuinely jealous. Also, I know you made a typo, but it did make me laugh Bogeymen is what you meant Boogymen reminds me of the joke in Millenium Man (How do you make a handkerchief dance - put a little boogie in it)

I actually have not, for real. And I keep getting beaten up here on HN just for daring to say it. Makes you think who is who in this situation. Bullies screaming they are the victims.

The only time I've ever seen anything that could be considered Rust evangelist is when someone with a chip on their shoulder shoves a github issue or random comment link in my face. I certainly don't encounter them in the wild.

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

#256

Post by awesome_dude »

LexiMax wrote: post #255
pdimitar wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually have not, for real. And I keep getting beaten up here on HN just for daring to say it. Makes you think who is who in this situation. Bullies screaming they are the victims.

The only time I've ever seen anything that could be considered Rust evangelist is when someone with a chip on their shoulder shoves a github issue or random comment link in my face. I certainly don't encounter them in the wild.

You're right - Rust has never had tech evangelists, absolutely never

In fact it's the only technology known to humans to never have had any such thing.

Puhleease.

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

#257

Post by LexiMax »

awesome_dude wrote: post #256
LexiMax wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only time I've ever seen anything that could be considered Rust evangelist is when someone with a chip on their shoulder shoves a github issue or random comment link in my face. I certainly don't encounter them in the wild.

You're right - Rust has never had tech evangelists, absolutely never In fact it's the only technology known to humans to never have had any such thing. Puhleease.

I'm not saying they don't exist. I'm saying that I don't encounter them in the wild. Certainly nowhere near as often as I encounter people who have a loud and obnoxious dislike of Rust.

What I'm trying to say is that if you see Rust evangelists everywhere, your label is either so wide-ranging as to be useless or you need to rm your rust_evangelist_evidence.txt because it's likely taking up a disproportionate amount of headspace.

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

#258

Post by areweai »

What I find most concerning about this is the meta-dialogue. At first I was critical of the maintainers for closing this github issue as off topic.

Then I realized that the github ui was auto-collapsing a dozen messages in a row that were all completely devoid of any informational value and certainly sourced from forums and community discord channels.

This places everyone in a no-win situation. Someone who has identified critical issues that they believe the majority of a relevant community would be concerned about has good reason to signal-boost as much as they can.

It's a substantial request about very recent changes, and tone-policing it doesn't make it less true. The problem is that the additional attention literally kills the discussion. This also provides cover for people who may be making more emotive or ai-psychosis influenced decisions on the maintainer side.

Projects with a siege mentality which block and ignore criticism tend to go off the rails very quickly. On the other hand, maintainer burnout is inevitable for projects which can't shield maintainers from the anxieties and pathologies of people who seem to think that if they complain about AI enough, everyone else will stop trying to use and improve it it.

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

#259

Post by arjie »

Animats wrote: post #111
Animats wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "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 module with the code mentioned is at [1] This is awful. They have some internal string format borrowed from a Zig library where the address of the item is in the low end of a pointer and the length is at the high end. Why are they doing that in 2026? It lets you save a few bytes at best. It doesn't enforce the Rust rule that strings must be strict UTF-8. It's totally alien to the safe way Rust handles strings. [1…

The Bun founder/author has talked about this before as a temporary artifact: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48141297

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

#260

Post by arjie »

whimsicalism wrote: post #45

It is really sad and unfortunate that coding has started falling under the omnicause. Low-denominator discourse is invading every space I find interesting and it is difficult to avoid.

I am having to blacklist a lot of commenters on this site because they are providing misinformation unnecessarily. There's all this garbage about "big flashy announcements" and so on when all the posts are by random people observing an internal detail of an open-source program's VCS or whatever.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48073680 (seems like just a normal user - enthusiast at best)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48132488 (this one seems suspicious - 2 year old user with this being their only submission ever and they have zero comments - anthropic could have submarined it but it's not a big flashy announcement)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48150900 (this thread - user is anti-AI and anti-datacenter)

But definitely the one thing these things aren't are big flashy announcement. To be honest, this kind of post-truth environment where people just make up things about people they don't like are super-lame. I've generally been able to deal with it by kill-filing people who post falsehoods but the number of users who do is getting so extraordinarily large I am starting to believe that I need to auto-hide anyone who created an account in the last 10 years.

Post reply on HN