4 ms·

It's alarming how people instantly jump to conclusions that Bun is now "AI slop". Bun has been almost entirely worked on by LLM's for ~6 months now, long befor

by Zakis1 4mo ago

It's alarming how people instantly jump to conclusions that Bun is now "AI slop". Bun has been almost entirely worked on by LLM's for ~6 months now, long before the Rust re-write (source: https://x.com/jarredsumner/status/2054525268296118363 https://x.com/jarredsumner/status/2054525268296118363). It already has been proven that LLM's can maintain such codebases.

RiOuseR 4mo ago
[dead]
nicce 4mo ago
> It already has been proven that LLM's can maintain such codebases. Is it? Seems like bugs in Claude Code are getting out of hands. That project has a bit more lifetime.
- sibeliuss 4mo ago
  Is it that, or is it just that every software developer, enterprise, dev and non-dev alike has their eyes on Claude Code as the most popular software project ever? Software in general has tons of bugs. People need to understand scale here, and what this looks like in practice. They're doing an incredible job given the circumstances.
  - nicoburns 4mo ago
    > Claude Code as the most popular software project ever I don't think that's true? The likes of Chrome, Linux, curl, sqlite, etc, are much more widely used.
    - sibeliuss 4mo ago
      I'm not being literal. Revolutionary technology arrives on the scene, is extremely visible, changes a whole industry and frankly creates an entirely new economy. All eyes on Anthropic. They don't get enough credit for being right in the middle of a revolution, yet still managing to ship something that largely works incredibly well, because this thing is a workhorse.
      - rrvsh 4mo ago
        They don't get enough credit? Anthropic is making an insane amount of money. More popular software projects have made exponentially less and have received even less media attention/fame/whatever metric you might use to define success.
fallenscope 4mo ago
> It already has been proven that LLM's can maintain such codebases. It hasn't. Those are two different scenarios. The first is individual PRs into an existing, majority human-authored and understood codebase where the PRs are initiated and merged by humans even if the code is AI generated. The second is AI rewriting AI written code that no human eye has seen. Bun took a conservative, transliteration file-by-file approach so they still understand the data structures and architecture so they will probably be okay though.
ramon156 4mo ago
Worked on by LLMs is fine, but the rust pr proved no one is reviewing anymore. You cannot review 1M LOC in 5 days.
kikimora 4mo ago
Bun never was great in terms of stability. It has been vibe coded for 6 month but code was reviewed by a person. >It already has been proven that LLM's can maintain such codebases. Proven is a strong word. In my experience AI fails miserably at anything beyond junior level tasks. We will see soon, once bun goes into production.
- esperent 4mo ago
  > Bun never was great in terms of stability It's very easy to throw shade like this on software if you've got a bugbear with it. I'm sure you can even come up with a bunch of these "stability" problems when challenged on it. I know I could, for basically any large piece of software that I've ever used. But really, is bun worse in this regard than any other similarly ambitious open source software within it's first few years?
  - conartist6 4mo ago
    see that's fine with me if they want to take a year or two of human time and do the rewrite properly this is a piece of software with no architecture, and whose owners have no regard or respect for architecture. I can virtually guarantee that on average every bug they fix will create one new bug, because that's what it's like to work on software with no intentional architecture
    - brabel 4mo ago
      What are you talking about?? Bun in Rust is a port, almost exactly the same code base on a different syntax. The architecture did not change at all. Amazing how people comment without even knowing what they are talking about.
      - soraminazuki 4mo ago
        Very amazing indeed. Here you are making bold assumptions about a huge pile of code not a single human being has ever read in any meaningful amount.
lioeters 4mo ago
It's alarming how people are willing to overlook the obvious in-your-face sloppiness of the Bun rewrite. A million lines of code in 9 days, pushed to main branch, forced on the existing userbase irresponsibly. Nobody understands the code, nor will they be able to maintain it without AI service as an external dependency. Give me a break, I'm not running that monstrosity on my machine. Everyone running production software should move away from Bun purely as a technical decision.
- j_bum 4mo ago
  Do you use Claude code on your machine? That seems mostly vibe coded
  - wiseowise 4mo ago
    Claude Code isn’t a runtime that I use to execute my code with.
    - brabel 4mo ago
      If you use it to write code for you, then it kind of is, indirectly.
      - dbalatero 4mo ago
        That is quite the stretch you're making.
        yen223 4mo ago
        I run my code on Emacs as nature intended
  - sleples 4mo ago
    1. I don't use Claude Code, no. 2. It's amazing that a CLI wrapper is as buggy as it is. 3. Nevertheless, it's useable, and maybe for a CLI that's enough. I don't want a JS runtime running production to be the same mess.
wiseowise 4mo ago
> Bun has been almost entirely worked on by LLM's for ~6 months now So what you’re saying is that this boycot is 6 months overdue?
- skeledrew 4mo ago
  I think what they're is all is well as long as they aren't told that LLMs are doing most of the work. Being in the know is the issue here IMO as they would've continued using without a word otherwise.
lazzlazzlazz 4mo ago
Yeah, bizarre and sad. And, unsurprisingly, Hacker News seems sympathetic. They are getting very old.
Griffinsauce 4mo ago
6 months is plenty of time to keep ignoring serious tech debt. I don't think your conclusion follows at all from such a short time.
yoav 4mo ago
That explains the massive rise in segfaults since they got acquired. It’s approaching being as buggy as claude code which I’ve had to stop using even though I have 6 months free of max because it just crashes and freezes all the time.

by Zakis1 4mo ago

RiOuseR 4mo ago

[dead]

nicce 4mo ago

> It already has been proven that LLM's can maintain such codebases. Is it? Seems like bugs in Claude Code are getting out of hands. That project has a bit more lifetime.

sibeliuss 4mo ago
Is it that, or is it just that every software developer, enterprise, dev and non-dev alike has their eyes on Claude Code as the most popular software project ever? Software in general has tons of bugs. People need to understand scale here, and what this looks like in practice. They're doing an incredible job given the circumstances.
- nicoburns 4mo ago
  > Claude Code as the most popular software project ever I don't think that's true? The likes of Chrome, Linux, curl, sqlite, etc, are much more widely used.
  - sibeliuss 4mo ago
    I'm not being literal. Revolutionary technology arrives on the scene, is extremely visible, changes a whole industry and frankly creates an entirely new economy. All eyes on Anthropic. They don't get enough credit for being right in the middle of a revolution, yet still managing to ship something that largely works incredibly well, because this thing is a workhorse.
    - rrvsh 4mo ago
      They don't get enough credit? Anthropic is making an insane amount of money. More popular software projects have made exponentially less and have received even less media attention/fame/whatever metric you might use to define success.

fallenscope 4mo ago

> It already has been proven that LLM's can maintain such codebases. It hasn't. Those are two different scenarios. The first is individual PRs into an existing, majority human-authored and understood codebase where the PRs are initiated and merged by humans even if the code is AI generated. The second is AI rewriting AI written code that no human eye has seen. Bun took a conservative, transliteration file-by-file approach so they still understand the data structures and architecture so they will probably be okay though.

ramon156 4mo ago

Worked on by LLMs is fine, but the rust pr proved no one is reviewing anymore. You cannot review 1M LOC in 5 days.

kikimora 4mo ago

Bun never was great in terms of stability. It has been vibe coded for 6 month but code was reviewed by a person. >It already has been proven that LLM's can maintain such codebases. Proven is a strong word. In my experience AI fails miserably at anything beyond junior level tasks. We will see soon, once bun goes into production.

esperent 4mo ago
> Bun never was great in terms of stability It's very easy to throw shade like this on software if you've got a bugbear with it. I'm sure you can even come up with a bunch of these "stability" problems when challenged on it. I know I could, for basically any large piece of software that I've ever used. But really, is bun worse in this regard than any other similarly ambitious open source software within it's first few years?
- conartist6 4mo ago
  see that's fine with me if they want to take a year or two of human time and do the rewrite properly this is a piece of software with no architecture, and whose owners have no regard or respect for architecture. I can virtually guarantee that on average every bug they fix will create one new bug, because that's what it's like to work on software with no intentional architecture
  - brabel 4mo ago
    What are you talking about?? Bun in Rust is a port, almost exactly the same code base on a different syntax. The architecture did not change at all. Amazing how people comment without even knowing what they are talking about.
    - soraminazuki 4mo ago
      Very amazing indeed. Here you are making bold assumptions about a huge pile of code not a single human being has ever read in any meaningful amount.

lioeters 4mo ago

It's alarming how people are willing to overlook the obvious in-your-face sloppiness of the Bun rewrite. A million lines of code in 9 days, pushed to main branch, forced on the existing userbase irresponsibly. Nobody understands the code, nor will they be able to maintain it without AI service as an external dependency. Give me a break, I'm not running that monstrosity on my machine. Everyone running production software should move away from Bun purely as a technical decision.

j_bum 4mo ago
Do you use Claude code on your machine? That seems mostly vibe coded
- wiseowise 4mo ago
  Claude Code isn’t a runtime that I use to execute my code with.
  - brabel 4mo ago
    If you use it to write code for you, then it kind of is, indirectly.
    - dbalatero 4mo ago
      That is quite the stretch you're making.
      - yen223 4mo ago
        I run my code on Emacs as nature intended
- sleples 4mo ago
  1. I don't use Claude Code, no. 2. It's amazing that a CLI wrapper is as buggy as it is. 3. Nevertheless, it's useable, and maybe for a CLI that's enough. I don't want a JS runtime running production to be the same mess.

wiseowise 4mo ago

> Bun has been almost entirely worked on by LLM's for ~6 months now So what you’re saying is that this boycot is 6 months overdue?

skeledrew 4mo ago
I think what they're is all is well as long as they aren't told that LLMs are doing most of the work. Being in the know is the issue here IMO as they would've continued using without a word otherwise.

lazzlazzlazz 4mo ago

Yeah, bizarre and sad. And, unsurprisingly, Hacker News seems sympathetic. They are getting very old.

Griffinsauce 4mo ago

6 months is plenty of time to keep ignoring serious tech debt. I don't think your conclusion follows at all from such a short time.

yoav 4mo ago

That explains the massive rise in segfaults since they got acquired. It’s approaching being as buggy as claude code which I’ve had to stop using even though I have 6 months free of max because it just crashes and freezes all the time.