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

Rewrite Bun in Rust has been merged

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

461–470 of 822 posts

Re: Rewrite Bun in Rust has been merged

#461

Post by mswphd »

12_throw_away wrote: post #381
zozbot234 wrote: post #380

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One potential way to solve this in a principled manner is to turn at least some "unsafe" annotations into ghost capability tokens that are explicitly threaded through the code and consistently checked by the compiler. Manufacturing the capability could itself be left as an unsafe operation, or require a runtime check of some kind. You already see this in some cases, for example the NonZero generic type can be viewed…

Yes, or you could review the code.

even when you can review the code, it's good to have the compiler check for you. This is for similar reasons why it's better to have CI check correctness on each code change, vs testing the code thoroughly one time, and then being careful going forward.

Re: Rewrite Bun in Rust has been merged

#462

Post by BoorishBears »

embedding-shape wrote: post #390
serial_dev wrote: post #357

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Nobody could have seen this coming…”? Well apparently a lot of people did. Maybe Jarred didn’t, maybe you didn’t, but most people correctly predicted what was coming.

See what coming?! I really don't understand what's going on here. Correctly predicted what, that Bun was being rewritten into Rust? I'm not sure anyone doubted that, all the work they did was public??? What on earth is going on here?

It's really simple.

9 days ago this is how the migration was described:

> I work on Bun and this is my branch

> This whole thread is an overreaction. 302 comments about code that does not work. We haven’t committed to rewriting. There’s a very high chance all this code gets thrown out completely.

> I’m curious to see what a working version of this looks, what it feels like, how it performs and if/how hard it’d be to get it to pass Bun’s test suite and be maintainable. I’d like to be able to compare a viable Rust version and a Zig version side by side.

9 days after that comment, the rewrite has been merged to master.

9 days after "this is my branch" "the code doesn't work" "I'm just curious" "high chance it's thrown out"... it's merged to master.

-

Some people saw the original as an attempt to downplay the importance of the branch in response to negative feedback, rather than accurately describing what the branch represented.

Those people essentially predicted that Bun's actions would shortly reflect much more conviction than was being let on.

Experiments graduate to production all the time, but given the timelines involved, their predictions were correct.

Re: Rewrite Bun in Rust has been merged

#464

Post by tln »

sesm wrote: post #368

When announcements say that rewrite took 1 week, I wonder how much time went into preparing this file with very detailed instructions on mapping Zig to Rust idioms: https://github.com/oven-sh/bun/commit/46d3bc29f270fa881dd573... On top of that, if you look at 'Pointers & ownership' and 'Collections' sections, the Bun codebase is already prepared, using internal smart pointer types that map 1-to-1 to Rust equivalents,…

Seems like Zig Bun had 3 pointer types that map neatly to existing Rust pointer types. The other 7-8 needed types to be created.

Is that the conspiracy?

bun_collections doesn't look much older than the porting guide.

Re: Rewrite Bun in Rust has been merged

#466

Post by ivanjermakov »

For those looking for an alternative no-compilation TypeScript runner, I'm quite satisfied with TSX: https://github.com/privatenumber/tsx

Node.js itself is getting quite close to running TypeScript natively, but they don't support using ES imports of CJS packages and importing with no-extension qualifier.

Re: Rewrite Bun in Rust has been merged

#469

Post by famouswaffles »

grayhatter wrote: post #434
embedding-shape wrote: post #390

Earlier quoted context omitted.

See what coming?! I really don't understand what's going on here. Correctly predicted what, that Bun was being rewritten into Rust? I'm not sure anyone doubted that, all the work they did was public??? What on earth is going on here?

> What on earth is going on here? With the nearly complete PR with the port to rust, a number of people predicted that it was going to happen. They were assured it's unlikely to happen and then they were accused of overreacting over effectively nothing. When those same people who were already upset about the rewrite, learned that their predictions the same ones that were rudely dismissed, were in fact, correct, they…

>Correct or not, it's reasonable to conclude they were lied to.

No it's not. If we were 9 days away from a human written version of this experiment then yeah it would be reasonable to conclude they were lied to, because a human written version would progress so much slower and steadier that it's very unlikely you hadn't made up most of your mind a week before merge time.

But it's not human written. It's months, perhaps years of work compressed into a week, where the machine can go from 'nothing is working' to 'everything is working' in a few days. There is nothing reasonable about concluding you must have been lied to when such a delta in such a short time is possible. And if people fail to see that, then perhaps the initial assertions about an emotional meltdown were not so far off after all.

Re: Rewrite Bun in Rust has been merged

#470

Post by zzzoom »

ukblewis wrote: post #414
shimman wrote: post #384

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. Get hired into a company where you have a solid bet on making multi-century lasting generational wealth (>$50,000,000). 2. Every waking moment do everything in your power to boost the company that might give you the ability to define the direction of technology for the rest of your life. 3. Use the only thing you have (bun) to help push you in this direction and do things to help boost LLM marketing (a technology…

I’m honestly confused. What is it that you think makes these workers “more evil” than Google and Facebook workers from the early 2010s?

And definitely not more evil than the workers at current Meta.
Post reply on HN