4 ms·
Not sure I understand. Bun's changes are merged on the dev branch and available for use, no? EDIT: Oh, look, blog post on the front page now. https://bun.com/
by Tadpole9181 3mo ago
Not sure I understand. Bun's changes are merged on the dev branch and available for use, no?
EDIT: Oh, look, blog post on the front page now.
https://bun.com/blog/bun-in-rust https://bun.com/blog/bun-in-rust
> Bun v1.3.14 was the last version of Bun written in Zig. Bun v1.4.0 will be the first version of Bun written in Rust. It's available in canary now.
So, yes, it seems it was definitely more than a "marketing stunt" and it's broadly available and slated to be the production release soon.
- NamlchakKhandro 3mo ago[flagged]
- jibal 3mo ago[flagged]
- pjmlp 3mo agoThe irony is that the blog post actually points out as pain points the reasons many of us assert languages like Zig are out of place in the 21st century. A nice collection of heap-use-after-free crash, use-after-free crash, crash and out-of-bounds read, memory leak, double-free crash, race condition crash.
- moogly 3mo agoA minor version bump? Exciting times we live in.
- Tadpole9181 3mo agoWhat exactly is your complaint? It doesn't make any breaking changes. That's how semantic versioning works.
- andai 3mo agoBun is infrastructure. Why would I want my infrastructure to be unstable? (By the way, 10,000 unsafe blocks last I checked, though the number is going down somewhat.)
- Tadpole9181 3mo agoI've never used bun on production for this very reason. But nevertheless, tens of thousands of people and businesses do. And I'm not sure how you're responding to my comment. The parent said "this is a marketing stunt" derogatorily, as if it's slop that doesn't work. This is already the canary build, it's more stable than the current stable, and is actively in production products in wide use. The parent is objectively wrong, whether or not I personally use Bun.