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

Zig → Rust porting guide

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

581–590 of 592 posts

Re: Zig → Rust porting guide

#581

Post by throwaway2037 »

pie_flavor wrote: post #379
2colours wrote: post #363

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the question still deserves a proper answer.

Please observe a policy of extreme wisdom: https://github.com/Fody/Home/blob/master/pages/licensing-pat...

I do know why your post is downvoted, and I disagree with it. Here is my upvote.

I read the link that you shared. This is genius. To quote:

    > Community backed
    > Fody requires significant effort to maintain. As such it relies on financial support to ensure its long term viability.
    > It is expected that all developers using Fody become a Patron on OpenCollective.
I can remember years ago reading some posts/writings from none other than Richard Stallman (yeah, that guy). He was talking about charging people for a copy of the source code to your open source project. At the time, I thought it was weird and did not make sense. This is basically the same thing but in 2026. After watching so much bullshit around open source projects (basically, assholes expecting free service for whining the loudest), I have come to the conclusion that "money talks" and helps to realign incentives that are warped by open source.

Re: Zig → Rust porting guide

#582

Post by maxloh »

nikeee wrote: post #12
yladiz wrote: post #3

Why? Are there particular reasons that the maintainers of Bun feel the need to attempt to migrate from Zig to Rust?

Zig is a moving target that has breaking changes in every release (which is fine as they are sub-1.0). But that means that AI tools have been trained on outdated syntax/etc. Zig isn't that common, so there is even less training data to begin with. Rust on the other hand is pretty established by now and has less breaking changes. It also has more compile-time safety-guarantees that makes vibe-coding a bit more confide…

Is there even breaking change in Rust after 1.0?

Re: Zig → Rust porting guide

#583

Post by hellohello2 »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #580
hellohello2 wrote: post #578

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can view it as an overreaction, but also as a sign that your work is significant. It impressed some, and scared others. In any case, you made something interesting.

You're replying to the original author of Bun. Given the usage of Bun, and the fact that his company (primarily him, actually) was recently acquired by Anthropic for what I'm guessing was a bajillion dollars, I think he probably already knows his work is significant and that he made something interesting.

Lol! My bad, I wasn't aware it was the original author (my fault for replying with too little reading). In any case, I think what I said still applies to his LLM experiment.

Re: Zig → Rust porting guide

#584

Post by matsemann »

dspillett wrote: post #415
matsemann wrote: post #390

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not a very constructive, nor accurate, way of trying to dismiss all concerns around bun that has been raised.

I think that was a very constructive comment about the unconstructive way people are shoe-horning other concerns about bun into this thread abut a specific aspect which itself turns out to be just an experiment that someone knee-jerk reacted to , despite several active threads already discussing those matters one of which only just fell off the front page. While the concerns many have about Bun's potential future dir…

Maybe time to rethink your stance?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48094745

Re: Zig → Rust porting guide

#585

Post by a_shiine »

brabel wrote: post #374
xigoi wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The main difference is that the input to an LLM is in an ambiguous language.

A programming language is allowed to be ambiguous, I don’t know of a definition that excludes that!

The kinda thoughts you form when you ever only vibe-coded

Re: Zig → Rust porting guide

#586

Post by a_shiine »

shevy-java wrote: post #384
Jarred wrote: post #319

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 co…

> We haven’t committed to rewriting. There’s a very high chance all this code gets thrown out completely. Props for the effort man, but people have already picked up on Zig-to-Rust transition. Poor Zig folks ...

More like poor Bun

Re: Zig → Rust porting guide

#588

Post by Humphrey »

mohsen1 wrote: post #389
Humphrey wrote: post #16

I'll be very interested in how this AI port turns out. I am involved in a number of active projects that are being held back by the language / framework is holding back the project, but where a rewrite would be too big of a project to undertake by using only human power. I've had more success vibe coding Rust than I have in more dynamic languages. I suspect the strictness of the Rust compiler forces the AI agent to p…

Rust is a good choice to let LLMs run without a ton of supervision. In my experience you need to monitor the progress heavily and take ownership of the design of the thing you're building or porting. Test harness is a must. Each iteration should run the test and ensure it doesn't break things in other places. I am in the middle of porting TypeScript to Rust and learned a ton doing this. You can check out the work in…

Oh wow! That sounds like a massive task. How involved have you had to be? How much is this costing you in AI?

Re: Zig → Rust porting guide

#589

Post by sp4cec0wb0y »

Jarred wrote: post #319

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 co…

....you were saying?

Re: Zig → Rust porting guide

#590

Post by porridgeraisin »

luma wrote: post #417
kelnos wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if there was anything in private channels, the reasons stated in that forum post are alone more than enough to reject Bun's Zig changes.

And also great reasons for Bun to port themselves elsewhere. If they aren’t allowed to contribute to Zig, there’s very little reason to select Zig moving forward.

It's not that they were not allowed to contribute. If you read the ziggit link up thread it becomes clear why their solution was simply wrong.
Post reply on HN