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

Bun's experimental Rust rewrite hits 99.8% test compatibility on Linux x64 glibc

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

531–540 of 754 posts

Re: Bun's experimental Rust rewrite hits 99.8% test compatibility on Linux x64 glibc

#531

Post by lionkor »

mezyt wrote: post #259
Aurornis wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Translating a project that includes a good test suite from one language to another is known to be a great case where LLMs work well. When you’re starting with a complete codebase to use as an example and a test suite to check everything it’s much easier to iterate toward the desired goal. The LLM can already see what the goals are and how they’ve been implemented once already, which is a much easier problem than star…

Great case where rust works well too. I won't cite every famous libs that got rewritten in rust but it wasn't all with LLM.

I fail to think of a successful Rust rewrite, so far what I've seen is just programmers who aren't sufficiently experienced, who decide to pick Rust and rewrite something in it, and then (this is the bad part) claim it's better for that reason only. It never is. It's always worse, because rewrites fundamentally end up with a worse product first.

Re: Bun's experimental Rust rewrite hits 99.8% test compatibility on Linux x64 glibc

#533

Post by brabel »

TheRoque wrote: post #499
tempaccount5050 wrote: post #489

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This list is funny. All of these things existed in pre computer form. A scheduler used to be a person putting punch cards into a machine.

What's the human form of a video game ?

Board games? All sorts of toys?

Re: Bun's experimental Rust rewrite hits 99.8% test compatibility on Linux x64 glibc

#534

Post by iExploder »

sergiotapia wrote: post #215

jared's post is singlehandedly shitting on Zig's reputation. not good juju for him to post like that. "I am so tired of worrying about & spending lots of time fixing memory leaks and crashes and stability issues" bun was zig's poster child. if it moves away, it becomes yet another random language like nim or crystal.

I'd feel better to have that kind of person out of my community.

First of all, did he not pick the language for Bun himself? Then introduced bunch of memory bugs, sound like skill issue cascade.

I remember some years ago in podcast touting how amazing Zig is to allow them being so performant which was the claim to fame for Bun, now to turn around and shit on the thing. Interesting persona.

Re: Bun's experimental Rust rewrite hits 99.8% test compatibility on Linux x64 glibc

#535

Post by brabel »

foxes wrote: post #337
lioeters wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also a few days before that: > I expect OSS to go the opposite direction: no human contribution allowed. Slop will be a nostalgic relic of 2025 & 2026. We should have seen this coming after they got acquired by Anthropic, but it's still disappointing. I'm not against large language models as a technology, just thoroughly disgusted how these "AI" companies rose to power, eating the software industry and the rest of so…

How could it possibly be open source if it requires proprietary models developed by a few companies to writs the code. Seems like that would make open source entirely controlled by open ai, anthropic et al.

Open source and open weight models are already really good. I don’t think anyone really depends on the big AI companies anymore, if they go away, the open source models seem to be already sufficiently good to take the torch and will continue to improve thanks to research. They may require money to train , but the cost of that is already covered quite well and if these model became the mainstream way to use AI , more money from governments and research institutions would be poured into them.

That is actually a very plausible scenario!

Re: Bun's experimental Rust rewrite hits 99.8% test compatibility on Linux x64 glibc

#536

Post by IshKebab »

malisper wrote: post #250
mohsen1 wrote: post #75

Very impressive that they could do this so quickly because I have been on a similar project (porting TypeScript to Rust) for 5 months. But I guess I don't have access to Mythos and unlimited tokens. I'm also close to 100% pass rate. 99.6% at the time of writing. https://tsz.dev Rust is perfect for writing all of code using LLM. It's strict type system makes is less likely to make very dumb mistakes that other languag…

Same but for multi-threaded Postgres[0]. 96% pg regression tests pass after 1 month and 823K LOC. 8 Codex accounts at $200/mo is what i could use up with no Mythos I've also seen the benefits of Rust for this too. And making the bet that my pg experience will help me make good design choices around many of the things people have been having trouble with in pg for a long time[1]. Excited to see AI make it more possibl…

96% tests passing sounds impressive, but I remember that C compiler that had similar (or better) stats yet was still hilariously broken because the test suite didn't cover many "obvious" things that a human wouldn't get wrong even without the tests.

Re: Bun's experimental Rust rewrite hits 99.8% test compatibility on Linux x64 glibc

#537

Post by brabel »

geysersam wrote: post #478
theptip wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Rust is a complex language prone to refactoring avalanches This may be so, but LLMs are great at slogging through such tedious repercussions. I would say if the language prevents sloppy intermediate states, that actually makes it more amenable to AI; if you just half-ass a refactor into a conceptually inconsistent state, it’s possible for bad tests to fail to catch it in Python, say. But if many such incomplete sta…

This is true in my experience as well. I'd even say it's the most common failure mode of current AI! It "fixes" some problem locally and declares victory, but it doesn't fully address the consequences of the change everywhere, and then the codebase is inconsistent.

I’ve seen Claude address the consequences of a change in a way that honestly was more comprehensive than I would be capable of. But I still agree that sometimes it misses the mark. I think that may be due to “adaptive effort “ which Claude used now by default.

Re: Bun's experimental Rust rewrite hits 99.8% test compatibility on Linux x64 glibc

#539

Post by smj-edison »

baranul wrote: post #529
smj-edison wrote: post #521

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You might want to check their Codeberg then, because they've moved all their development over there...

Zig very much could of moved all of their GitHub issues over to Codeberg, to be resolved, but chose not to do so. Thus left thousands of issues unsolved and stranded. This maneuver was arguably obfuscated by the anti-LLM stance and finger pointing at Microsoft, but nevertheless, many still have noticed. Zig, for a long time, had been falling behind and doing poorly on their open to close ratio for resolving issues. I…

Did you read their migration post? They are thinking about it as COW, so they're using both issue trackers right now, but as soon as the update an issue it jumps straight to the Codeberg issue tracker. It's an unconventional way of doing it, but it's no conspiracy.

Re: Bun's experimental Rust rewrite hits 99.8% test compatibility on Linux x64 glibc

#540

Post by perlgeek »

Has anybody thought through the legal aspects of this, regarding code ownership?

As far as I understand the situation in the US (sorry, no idea where he is located), output from LLMs, once published, is essentially in the Public Domain, since there isn't any human who owns it.

However, in some sense, this is also a machine-assisted translation from one computer language into another, so one could argue that the ownership of the original code base still applies to the new one.

Which one is it? Is there any way to find out before a similar case goes to court?

Post reply on HN