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

Electrobun 2.0 will be decoupled from Bun due to the Rust rewrite

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 188 posts

Re: Electrobun 2.0 will be decoupled from Bun due to the Rust rewrite

#51

Post by sleples »

j_bum wrote: post #44
lioeters wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's alarming how people are willing to overlook the obvious in-your-face sloppiness of the Bun rewrite. A million lines of code in 9 days, pushed to main branch, forced on the existing userbase irresponsibly. Nobody understands the code, nor will they be able to maintain it without AI service as an external dependency. Give me a break, I'm not running that monstrosity on my machine. Everyone running production softw…

Do you use Claude code on your machine? That seems mostly vibe coded

1. I don't use Claude Code, no.

2. It's amazing that a CLI wrapper is as buggy as it is.

3. Nevertheless, it's useable, and maybe for a CLI that's enough. I don't want a JS runtime running production to be the same mess.

Re: Electrobun 2.0 will be decoupled from Bun due to the Rust rewrite

#52

Post by skeeter2020 »

ibejoeb wrote: post #36
consumer451 wrote: post #2

I have to say, this whole saga is extremely interesting. Not just from a popcorn-enjoyer's point of view, but as a bit of a bell weather for 2026 software dev.

People are going to be using a lot less software if the selection criteria include not being no agents.

This is a very uncharitable interpretation of the twitter post: "It’s a combination of anthropic’s stance of not doing human reviews or any kind of rational roll out and stabilization."

They mention nothing about agents being used, rather focus on humans in the review cycle and some sort of gated roll-out process. Why we would bin these practices in the name of a faster release cycle is an important question & debate.

Re: Electrobun 2.0 will be decoupled from Bun due to the Rust rewrite

#53

Post by wiseowise »

pessimizer wrote: post #46

This whole thing of shunning bun is a goofy protest against AI in general by a bunch of programmers about to transition from vastly overpaid to mostly unemployed, sometimes thinly disguised as quality concerns and piggybacking a little bit on the anti-"rewrite it in rust" train. Still, I can't help but entirely support it. I don't want hard dependencies on gigantic megacorps, or on any single provider who can go rogu…

> This whole thing of shunning bun is a goofy protest against AI in general by a bunch of programmers about to transition from vastly overpaid to mostly unemployed, sometimes thinly disguised as quality concerns and piggybacking a little bit on the anti-"rewrite it in rust" train.

It is interesting how you find millions of people put on the street “goofy”, all while concentrating wealth in the hands of a couple of hyperscalers.

Re: Electrobun 2.0 will be decoupled from Bun due to the Rust rewrite

#54

Post by skeeter2020 »

contextcost wrote: post #21
qsera wrote: post #3

I think it makes sense to stay away from large code bases built using LLMs until it is proven that it is possible to also maintain such code bases using LLMs or using reasonable human effort.

I have an idea on how to tell if a codebase is rotting under AI Agent maintenance. We can collect and analyze how the coding agent reads code during programming tasks, and see if the code access and token consumption are steadily increasing for similar development tasks. If the code readability doesn't degrade for the agent, the maintainability of the codebase should be fine.

We judge long-term quality of human codebases (at least OS) by ongoing activity; for LLM codebases maybe a consistent or increasing level of activity is a bad smell?

Re: Electrobun 2.0 will be decoupled from Bun due to the Rust rewrite

#55

Post by giancarlostoro »

sheeshkebab wrote: post #34
contextcost wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have an idea on how to tell if a codebase is rotting under AI Agent maintenance. We can collect and analyze how the coding agent reads code during programming tasks, and see if the code access and token consumption are steadily increasing for similar development tasks. If the code readability doesn't degrade for the agent, the maintainability of the codebase should be fine.

Mist of human written codebases are unusable for llm dev by that definition.

Turns out that if they're unusable by LLMs they're likely unusable by human devs. If you follow sane clean coding principles (like not having godclasses) it turns out coding agents (and humans!) can understand and navigate your codebase, especially if you use recognizable patterns, even with very light documentation.

Re: Electrobun 2.0 will be decoupled from Bun due to the Rust rewrite

#56

Post by conartist6 »

impulser_ wrote: post #16
mentalgear wrote: post #14

While I'm certainly sceptical of pure LLM (re)-written software, I would have to assume in the case of the cyberattack vector that Anthropic used their new Mythos model to adequately test against. Maybe someone has more info of them mentioning that.

Jarred said this had nothing to do with Mythos or Anthropic.

I have a very, very hard time believing that. Surely the acquisition left his wealth largely in the form of Anthropic stock, so his personal definition of success is "rep Anthropic so my stock goes up" and at that point he has succeeded.

Me, I still have to be competent to succeed. I don't just get to declare that because I used AI the effort was a success, and I have 0 desire to work with those kinds of people.

Re: Electrobun 2.0 will be decoupled from Bun due to the Rust rewrite

#57

Post by wiseowise »

punchmesan wrote: post #43
tln wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What? Why? Git has branches...

They're two completely different codebases... even if they are 100% feature parity, it's 100% different code. They should absolutely be separate from each other, with different issues lists. Clean separation of two different codebases isn't a strange concept...

Judging by the comments, Bun as a company doesn’t give a single shit about community. The only reason it is in the same repo is tracking down issues, discussions, etc. Those would be hard to migrate.

Re: Electrobun 2.0 will be decoupled from Bun due to the Rust rewrite

#58

Post by skeeter2020 »

j_bum wrote: post #44
lioeters wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's alarming how people are willing to overlook the obvious in-your-face sloppiness of the Bun rewrite. A million lines of code in 9 days, pushed to main branch, forced on the existing userbase irresponsibly. Nobody understands the code, nor will they be able to maintain it without AI service as an external dependency. Give me a break, I'm not running that monstrosity on my machine. Everyone running production softw…

Do you use Claude code on your machine? That seems mostly vibe coded

that seems comparable to taking a dev-time dependency, while bun is a runtime dependency. THey need to be treated very differently.

Re: Electrobun 2.0 will be decoupled from Bun due to the Rust rewrite

#59

Post by ibejoeb »

skeeter2020 wrote: post #52
ibejoeb wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People are going to be using a lot less software if the selection criteria include not being no agents.

This is a very uncharitable interpretation of the twitter post: "It’s a combination of anthropic’s stance of not doing human reviews or any kind of rational roll out and stabilization." They mention nothing about agents being used, rather focus on humans in the review cycle and some sort of gated roll-out process. Why we would bin these practices in the name of a faster release cycle is an important question & debate…

I kind of agree, but it goes both ways. Has Jarred said that there was no review? I know that he stated that rust bun passes tests. Now, I don't know the amount or quantity of coverage, but as a thought experiment, let's assume they are good. What does that count for?

Re: Electrobun 2.0 will be decoupled from Bun due to the Rust rewrite

#60

Post by skeeter2020 »

mentalgear wrote: post #14

While I'm certainly sceptical of pure LLM (re)-written software, I would have to assume in the case of the cyberattack vector that Anthropic used their new Mythos model to adequately test against. Maybe someone has more info of them mentioning that.

so they are defending the LLM-generated code using another one of their LLMs, against attacks from yet other LLMs? So regardless of the outcome and impact on us, they win?
Post reply on HN