Beware of Bun.js

#1

Post by undefined_void » Fri, Oct 14, 2022, 3:33 AM UTC

Re: Beware of Bun.js

#2

Post by c54 » Fri, Oct 14, 2022, 4:19 AM UTC

This reads as a bit salty but I’m not mired in javascript enough to evaluate the specifics. My impression is that bun is quite liked in the community. These appear to be a few minor grips.

Anyone have more in-depth understanding?

Re: Beware of Bun.js

#3

Post by troquerre » Fri, Oct 14, 2022, 4:25 AM UTC

There should be a disclaimer that the author works for Deno https://gist.github.com/littledivy

Re: Beware of Bun.js

#4

Post by sergiotapia » Fri, Oct 14, 2022, 4:28 AM UTC

Very sad to read this. I thought Bun was above this type of thing and was the real deal. Do you think they were resorting to that kind of thing to pursue funding? This sucks :(

Re: Beware of Bun.js

#5

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Oct 14, 2022, 4:29 AM UTC

c54 wrote: post #2

This reads as a bit salty but I’m not mired in javascript enough to evaluate the specifics. My impression is that bun is quite liked in the community. These appear to be a few minor grips. Anyone have more in-depth understanding?

[deleted]

Re: Beware of Bun.js

#6

Post by mixedCase » Fri, Oct 14, 2022, 4:30 AM UTC

c54 wrote: post #2

This reads as a bit salty but I’m not mired in javascript enough to evaluate the specifics. My impression is that bun is quite liked in the community. These appear to be a few minor grips. Anyone have more in-depth understanding?

The post is claiming the Deno benchmarks created by Bun.js devs to compare/market their runtimes makes nonsensical choices that are more adequately explained by a malicious intent to misrepresent Deno than oversights.

Seems to be the case IMO, but it's not 100% cut and dry. Bun.js' position could be adequately explained in every case as "the defaults/obvious choices for these benchmarks in Deno are slow", but then again they are consciously making apples to oranges comparisons which feels dishonest to me.

Re: Beware of Bun.js

#7

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Oct 14, 2022, 4:30 AM UTC

c54 wrote: post #2

This reads as a bit salty but I’m not mired in javascript enough to evaluate the specifics. My impression is that bun is quite liked in the community. These appear to be a few minor grips. Anyone have more in-depth understanding?

[deleted]

Re: Beware of Bun.js

#8

Post by ph4evers » Fri, Oct 14, 2022, 4:31 AM UTC

Seems a bit of a general theme. Not long ago I saw an article claiming Bun was faster than Rust Hyper webserver, but the author forgot to turn off debug mode. Article is gone now: https://medium.com/cooking-with-bun/hello-world-performance-...

Re: Beware of Bun.js

#9

Post by girvo » Fri, Oct 14, 2022, 4:31 AM UTC

sergiotapia wrote: post #4

Very sad to read this. I thought Bun was above this type of thing and was the real deal. Do you think they were resorting to that kind of thing to pursue funding? This sucks :(

I don't think this is malice, more that frankly developers are really bad at benchmarks. Myself included.

Re: Beware of Bun.js

#10

Post by fritolaid » Fri, Oct 14, 2022, 4:32 AM UTC

The thing about Bun that turns me off is around the OS-specific system call optimizations (using different optimizations for different platforms) which means that each new feature they add to bun that uses any system calls must be done 3 times for the 3 major platforms (MacOS, Windows, Linux)

Another thing is I believe Deno supports WebGPU and Node supports WebGL via Angle etc (for e.g. running Tensorflow with GPU support)but Bun not only has no story there but its author has refused to provide any info about their intent aroundGPU support.