Curious how the test suite was applied. Was it ported from Zig to Rust beforehand?
Bun's experimental Rust rewrite hits 99.8% test compatibility on Linux x64 glibc
61–70 of 754 posts
Re: Bun's experimental Rust rewrite hits 99.8% test compatibility on Linux x64 glibc
#62As expected, Modula-2 / Objective Pascal like safety was great during the last century, before automatic resource management, and improved type system became common in this century.
Naturally also have to note, wasn't this supposed to be only an experiment, nothing serious?
Re: Bun's experimental Rust rewrite hits 99.8% test compatibility on Linux x64 glibc
#63Presumably the biggest loser in all this is Zig, I only know of the language because of Bun. But the timescale still gives me pause… just because AI lets us convert a codebase in 6 days doesn’t mean it’s wise. There are surely a lot of downstream implications! It’s always felt a little like Bun is making up a plan as it goes along (and maybe that’s unfair), this seems to underline the point.
Re: Bun's experimental Rust rewrite hits 99.8% test compatibility on Linux x64 glibc
#64Earlier quoted context omitted.
Honestly, I fully support the rewrite to Rust, but he should have just owned this from the start. I'm sure he knew in the back of his mind how dedicated he was to that branch as he had already spent the equivalent of thousands of dollars in tokens by that point.
Bun was VC funded and acquired by Anthropic. He's spending company money, not his own money.
Re: Bun's experimental Rust rewrite hits 99.8% test compatibility on Linux x64 glibc
#65Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is your claim that using Zig ends in an "extremely high amount of crashes/memory bugs?" Wouldn't that mean that it isn't even feasible to make high-quality software with such a tool? There is a lot of quality stuff made with C/C++, so what is Zig doing wrong?
> Is your claim that using Zig ends in an "extremely high amount of crashes/memory bugs?" Wouldn't that mean that it isn't even feasible to make high-quality software with such a tool? What caused you to hallucinate such a broad blanket statement? The point is the memory unsafety issues they ran into would be categorically impossible in safe Rust, which is why they're doing this in the first place.
Re: Bun's experimental Rust rewrite hits 99.8% test compatibility on Linux x64 glibc
#66I wonder how much of this is original size vs rust requiring verbosity vs the LLM being verbose in general.
Not a criticism, I do believe language translation it's the one field that AI is mature enough to near one shot projects.
Re: Bun's experimental Rust rewrite hits 99.8% test compatibility on Linux x64 glibc
#67Being anthropic accuired project does he have access to mythos or it’s normal Claude we plebs have access to
As an Anthropic acquihire, not only does he have access to every model and service but he probably has infinite tokens available. Bun powers Claude.
Re: Bun's experimental Rust rewrite hits 99.8% test compatibility on Linux x64 glibc
#68Earlier quoted context omitted.
Honestly, I fully support the rewrite to Rust, but he should have just owned this from the start. I'm sure he knew in the back of his mind how dedicated he was to that branch as he had already spent the equivalent of thousands of dollars in tokens by that point.
Yeah but with no guarantee that it was going to work, why should he have?
Insert something about monkeys, typewriters, and Shakespeare here.
Re: Bun's experimental Rust rewrite hits 99.8% test compatibility on Linux x64 glibc
#69I just want to comment that I think it's a good change if we look past the AI involvement. Bun has had an extremely high amount of crashes/memory bugs due to them using Zig, unlike Deno which is Rust. Of course, if Bun's Rust port has tons of `unsafe`, it won't magically solve them all, but it'll still get better
Is your claim that using Zig ends in an "extremely high amount of crashes/memory bugs?" Wouldn't that mean that it isn't even feasible to make high-quality software with such a tool? There is a lot of quality stuff made with C/C++, so what is Zig doing wrong?
They're difficult to find, difficult to reason about in big software and you'll always create some. Languages that rule that out are a huge improvement in terms of correctness.
Re: Bun's experimental Rust rewrite hits 99.8% test compatibility on Linux x64 glibc
#70I just want to comment that I think it's a good change if we look past the AI involvement. Bun has had an extremely high amount of crashes/memory bugs due to them using Zig, unlike Deno which is Rust. Of course, if Bun's Rust port has tons of `unsafe`, it won't magically solve them all, but it'll still get better
Is your claim that using Zig ends in an "extremely high amount of crashes/memory bugs?" Wouldn't that mean that it isn't even feasible to make high-quality software with such a tool? There is a lot of quality stuff made with C/C++, so what is Zig doing wrong?