5 ms·

I don't really see how Bun fits as an acquisition for an AI company. This seems more like "we have tons of capital and we want to buy something great" than "Bun

by jjordan 11mo ago

I don't really see how Bun fits as an acquisition for an AI company. This seems more like "we have tons of capital and we want to buy something great" than "Bun is essential to our core business model".

nurumaik 11mo ago
Looks like they are acquiring the team rather than the product
- simonw 11mo ago
  No, they're clearly acquiring the technology. They're betting Claude Code on Bun, they have an invested interest in the health of Bun.
  - LunaSea 11mo ago
    Why would they want to bet on nascent technology whereas Node.js bas existed for a god 15 years?
    - stonogo 11mo ago
      Because Microsoft already owns that.
      - Octoth0rpe 11mo ago
        Are you referring to node? MS doesn't own that. It's maintained by Joyent, who in turn is owned by Samsung.
        simonw 11mo ago
        Joyent handed Node.js over to a foundation in 2015, and that foundation merged into the JS Foundation to become the OpenJS Foundation in 2019. I'm not sure if Joyent have any significant role in Node.js maintenance any more.
        Octoth0rpe 11mo ago
        Oops, thank you :) regardless, it's certainly not MS.
        stonogo 11mo ago
        Microsoft owns npm outright and controls every aspect of the infrastructure that node.js relies on. It also sits on the board (and is one of the few platinum members) of the Linux Foundation, which controls openjs. It is certainly MS.
      - deleted 11mo ago
        [deleted]
    - jitl 11mo ago
      it starts fast and does better job than nodejs for their product
    - simonw 11mo ago
      Because they needed something that could produce a single binary that works on every platform. They started shipping Claude Code with Bun back in July: https://x.com/jarredsumner/status/1943492457506697482 https://x.com/jarredsumner/status/1943492457506697482
      - LunaSea 11mo ago
        They could use the Node.js equivalent: https://nodejs.org/api/single-executable-applications.html#single-executable-applications https://nodejs.org/api/single-executable-applications.html#s...
        simonw 11mo ago
        They evidently evaluated Node.js in comparison to Bun (and Deno) earlier this year and came to a technical decision about which one worked best for their product.
        dvtkrlbs 11mo ago
        I highly doubt that the JS ecosystem is driven mostly by hype so I highly doubt the nodejs solution even put on a table in an internal issue tracker.
        simonw 11mo ago
        Claude Code shipped on top of Node.js for the first four months of its existence. Why wouldn't they consider their options for bundling that version into a single binary using Node.js tooling before adopting Bun?
        zstscrs 11mo ago
        Every time I see people mention things like this in node vs bun or deno conversations I wonder if they even tried them. >The single executable application feature currently only supports running a single embedded script using the CommonJS module system. >Users can include assets by adding a key-path dictionary to the configuration as the assets field. At build time, Node.js would read the assets from the specified paths and bundle them into the preparation blob. In the generated executable, users can retrieve the assets using the sea.getAsset() and sea.getAssetAsBlob() APIs. Meanwhile, here's all I need to do to get an exe out of my project right now with, assets and all: > bun build ./bin/start.ts --compile --outfile dist/myprogram.exe > [32ms] bundle 60 modules > [439ms] compile dist/myprogram.exe it detects my dynamic imports of jsons assets (language files, default configuration) and bundles them accordingly in the executable. I don't need a separate file to declare assets, declare imports, or do anything other than just run this command line. I don't need to look at the various bundlers and find one that works fine with my CLI tool and converts its ESM/TypeScript to CJS, Bun just knows what to do. Node is death through thousand cuts compared to the various experiences offered by Bun. Node adds quite the startup latency over Bun too and is just not too pleasant for making CLI scripts.
  - giancarlostoro 11mo ago
    That was my thinking is, this would be useful for Claude Code.
gkoberger 11mo ago
If Anthropic wants to own code development in the future, owning the full platform (including the runtime) makes sense. Programming languages all are a balance between performance/etc and making it easy for a human to interact with. This balance is going to shit as AI writes more code (and I assume Anthropic wants a future where humans might not even see the code, but rather an abstraction of it... after all, all code we look at is an abstraction on some level).
- singularity2001 11mo ago
  "the full platform" there are more languages than ts though? Acquisition of Apple Swift division incoming?
  - tomashubelbauer 11mo ago
    TypeScript is the most popular programming language on the most popular software hosting platform though, owning the best runtime for that seems like it would fit Pareto's rule well enough: https://github.blog/news-insights/octoverse/octoverse-a-new-developer-joins-github-every-second-as-ai-leads-typescript-to-1/#the-top-programming-languages-of-2025-typescript-jumps-to-1-while-python-takes-2 https://github.blog/news-insights/octoverse/octoverse-a-new-...
  - bigyabai 11mo ago
    Why acquire Swift when you can write iOS apps in Typescript instead?
    - giancarlostoro 11mo ago
      Which would use something like Bun ;)
  - giancarlostoro 11mo ago
    According to a JetBrains dev survey (I forget the year) roughly 58% of devs deploy to the web. That's a big money pie right there.
sankalpmukim 11mo ago
Does this acquisition mean Claude Code the CLI is more valuable than entiriety of Bun?
- gehsty 11mo ago
  It certainly generated more revenue, so this is not surprising?
  - re-thc 11mo ago
    > It certainly generated more revenue, so this is not surprising? Anything is greater than 0
    - dangoodmanUT 11mo ago
      except for losing money?
- simonw 11mo ago
  Claude Code has an annual run rate of $1bn. Bun currently has an annual run rate of $0.
- throwaway290 11mo ago
  No, just that people who borrowed bun 7 million dollars want some of it back...
rvz 11mo ago
It does actually. Claude Code is a 1B+ cash machine and Anthropic directly uses Bun for it. Acquiring Bun lowers the risk of the software being unmaintained as Bun made $0 and relied on VC money. Makes sense, but this is just another day in San Francisco of a $0 revenue startup being bought out.
deleted 11mo ago
[deleted]
logsr 11mo ago
Claude Code running on Bun is an obvious justification, but Buns features (high performance runtime, fast starts, native TS) are also important for training and inference. For instance, in inference you develop a logical model in code that maps to a reasoning sequence, and then execute the code to validate and refine the model, then use this to inform further reasoning. Bun, which is highly integrated and highly focused on performance, is an ideal fit for this. Having Bun in house means that you can use the feedback from all of automation driven execution of Bun to drive improvements to its core.

by jjordan 11mo ago

nurumaik 11mo ago

Looks like they are acquiring the team rather than the product

simonw 11mo ago
No, they're clearly acquiring the technology. They're betting Claude Code on Bun, they have an invested interest in the health of Bun.
- LunaSea 11mo ago
  Why would they want to bet on nascent technology whereas Node.js bas existed for a god 15 years?
  - stonogo 11mo ago
    Because Microsoft already owns that.
    - Octoth0rpe 11mo ago
      Are you referring to node? MS doesn't own that. It's maintained by Joyent, who in turn is owned by Samsung.
      - simonw 11mo ago
        Joyent handed Node.js over to a foundation in 2015, and that foundation merged into the JS Foundation to become the OpenJS Foundation in 2019. I'm not sure if Joyent have any significant role in Node.js maintenance any more.
        Octoth0rpe 11mo ago
        Oops, thank you :) regardless, it's certainly not MS.
        stonogo 11mo ago
        Microsoft owns npm outright and controls every aspect of the infrastructure that node.js relies on. It also sits on the board (and is one of the few platinum members) of the Linux Foundation, which controls openjs. It is certainly MS.
    - deleted 11mo ago
      [deleted]
  - jitl 11mo ago
    it starts fast and does better job than nodejs for their product
  - simonw 11mo ago
    Because they needed something that could produce a single binary that works on every platform. They started shipping Claude Code with Bun back in July: https://x.com/jarredsumner/status/1943492457506697482 https://x.com/jarredsumner/status/1943492457506697482
    - LunaSea 11mo ago
      They could use the Node.js equivalent: https://nodejs.org/api/single-executable-applications.html#single-executable-applications https://nodejs.org/api/single-executable-applications.html#s...
      - simonw 11mo ago
        They evidently evaluated Node.js in comparison to Bun (and Deno) earlier this year and came to a technical decision about which one worked best for their product.
        dvtkrlbs 11mo ago
        I highly doubt that the JS ecosystem is driven mostly by hype so I highly doubt the nodejs solution even put on a table in an internal issue tracker.
        simonw 11mo ago
        Claude Code shipped on top of Node.js for the first four months of its existence. Why wouldn't they consider their options for bundling that version into a single binary using Node.js tooling before adopting Bun?
      - zstscrs 11mo ago
        Every time I see people mention things like this in node vs bun or deno conversations I wonder if they even tried them. >The single executable application feature currently only supports running a single embedded script using the CommonJS module system. >Users can include assets by adding a key-path dictionary to the configuration as the assets field. At build time, Node.js would read the assets from the specified paths and bundle them into the preparation blob. In the generated executable, users can retrieve the assets using the sea.getAsset() and sea.getAssetAsBlob() APIs. Meanwhile, here's all I need to do to get an exe out of my project right now with, assets and all: > bun build ./bin/start.ts --compile --outfile dist/myprogram.exe > [32ms] bundle 60 modules > [439ms] compile dist/myprogram.exe it detects my dynamic imports of jsons assets (language files, default configuration) and bundles them accordingly in the executable. I don't need a separate file to declare assets, declare imports, or do anything other than just run this command line. I don't need to look at the various bundlers and find one that works fine with my CLI tool and converts its ESM/TypeScript to CJS, Bun just knows what to do. Node is death through thousand cuts compared to the various experiences offered by Bun. Node adds quite the startup latency over Bun too and is just not too pleasant for making CLI scripts.
- giancarlostoro 11mo ago
  That was my thinking is, this would be useful for Claude Code.

gkoberger 11mo ago

If Anthropic wants to own code development in the future, owning the full platform (including the runtime) makes sense. Programming languages all are a balance between performance/etc and making it easy for a human to interact with. This balance is going to shit as AI writes more code (and I assume Anthropic wants a future where humans might not even see the code, but rather an abstraction of it... after all, all code we look at is an abstraction on some level).

singularity2001 11mo ago
"the full platform" there are more languages than ts though? Acquisition of Apple Swift division incoming?
- tomashubelbauer 11mo ago
  TypeScript is the most popular programming language on the most popular software hosting platform though, owning the best runtime for that seems like it would fit Pareto's rule well enough: https://github.blog/news-insights/octoverse/octoverse-a-new-developer-joins-github-every-second-as-ai-leads-typescript-to-1/#the-top-programming-languages-of-2025-typescript-jumps-to-1-while-python-takes-2 https://github.blog/news-insights/octoverse/octoverse-a-new-...
- bigyabai 11mo ago
  Why acquire Swift when you can write iOS apps in Typescript instead?
  - giancarlostoro 11mo ago
    Which would use something like Bun ;)
- giancarlostoro 11mo ago
  According to a JetBrains dev survey (I forget the year) roughly 58% of devs deploy to the web. That's a big money pie right there.

sankalpmukim 11mo ago

Does this acquisition mean Claude Code the CLI is more valuable than entiriety of Bun?

gehsty 11mo ago
It certainly generated more revenue, so this is not surprising?
- re-thc 11mo ago
  > It certainly generated more revenue, so this is not surprising? Anything is greater than 0
  - dangoodmanUT 11mo ago
    except for losing money?
simonw 11mo ago
Claude Code has an annual run rate of $1bn. Bun currently has an annual run rate of $0.
throwaway290 11mo ago
No, just that people who borrowed bun 7 million dollars want some of it back...

rvz 11mo ago

It does actually. Claude Code is a 1B+ cash machine and Anthropic directly uses Bun for it. Acquiring Bun lowers the risk of the software being unmaintained as Bun made $0 and relied on VC money. Makes sense, but this is just another day in San Francisco of a $0 revenue startup being bought out.

deleted 11mo ago

[deleted]

logsr 11mo ago

Claude Code running on Bun is an obvious justification, but Buns features (high performance runtime, fast starts, native TS) are also important for training and inference. For instance, in inference you develop a logical model in code that maps to a reasoning sequence, and then execute the code to validate and refine the model, then use this to inform further reasoning. Bun, which is highly integrated and highly focused on performance, is an ideal fit for this. Having Bun in house means that you can use the feedback from all of automation driven execution of Bun to drive improvements to its core.