Oh well, I really like using Bun and I get kinda sad about the turn they are taking after the Anthropic acquisition. I really want a good Node with batteries included, but I don't want it vibe coded.

▲

torben-friis 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Have there been any significant issues caused by the vibecoded translation?

To be clear, I'm not implying support for the merge. I am against this whole YOLO approach to engineering. Just curious how the switch is going since I haven't seen any news since the merge announcement.

	▲	827a 2 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		IMO the source of the new code is less important than the sheer volume of it. Bun does not need to be entirely rewritten; certainly not over a period of a week, possibly not even over a period of a year. Stability is hard-fought and battle-tested. Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face; and every repository has passing tests until it runs production code.
	▲	happytoexplain 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		It's too early. It might be too early forever.
	▲	cyanydeez 11 minutes ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Epistemically: if it can be so easily vibecoded to rust, why can't it be vibecoded to be reparted? Isn't the great and Almight AI unable to parse and repair Zig? Identify it's weak points and route around it?

▲

garbagepatch 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

According to the bun team, it was already vibecoded for months before the Anthropic acquisition.

▲

colordrops 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Unless specific issues have been identified that were introduced by it being "vibe coded", isn't a reaction to reject it outright without actually checking the ground truth just exhibiting the behavior you are criticizing?

▲

hootz 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

It's just a trust issue. Have you seen the absolute state of the Claude Code CLI development? I don't want that to suddenly happen to Bun after I've already used it for production stuff.

▲

gpm 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I don't see any hypocrisy in the comment you are criticizing. The behavior they are criticizing appears to be vibe coding. How is rejecting something for being vibe coding "exhibiting the behavior" of vibe coding?

▲

layer8 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The ground truth is that the new maintainers can’t possibly have a good understanding of the many millions of lines of vibe-translated code. Even assuming that the code happens to work okay in its current state, the lack of understanding means a high risk that its continuing maintenance won’t result in a satisfactory level of reliability.

	▲	rcxdude 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Aren't the maintainers the same people? I haven't seen any talk of who's working on it changing drastically.

▲

2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[deleted]

▲

happytoexplain 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

You want the yt-dlp authors to review the entire post-migration Bun codebase?

And what are you referring to as "behavior"?

	▲	colordrops an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Virtually no one reviews entire code bases of dependencies, what on earth are you talking about?

▲

majormajor 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I'm not sure what "exhibiting the behavior you are criticizing" would even mean here.

BUT.

"Ignore anything but actual problems" is a terrible stance to take generally for software and dependency selection. Incidents are fairly sparse, process is much easier to observe. So if you can find connections between process and incident possibility, that's a very reasonable heuristic. And it's easy to find examples of overaggressive LLM usage introducing problems into software.

▲

colordrops an hour ago | parent [-]

You are putting words in my mouth, I never said anything about such a stance.

The vast majority of new software is written using AI. The problem is not that it is written by AI, but rather than some people treat it like a black box. It is entirely possible to use AI to write code and verify that it is correct. Even Linus Torvalds is allowing AI generated code into the Linux kernel as long as it's managed properly.

	▲	happytoexplain 12 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		>The vast majority of new software is written using AI. The problem is not that it is written by AI How on earth does this follow? It's common, so it should be accepted without scrutiny? >The problem is not that it is written by AI, but rather than some people treat it like a black box. Yes, and guns don't kill people. Obviously the issue has two facets. It would be irrational to say "AI is flawless" or "humans are flawless". Allowing genAI code does not imply blindly trusting genAI code. >as long as it's managed properly. Correct. Hence the issue. This was vibe-coding by even the strictest definitions of the term. Vibe-coding is, by definition, not "properly managed".

▲

LoganDark 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I think it's hilarious how hopeful people were at the acquisition that Bun would be able to continue on mostly as it had been but then that all got completely thrown away and trashed.

(Hilarious in the way that's terribly sad, of course.)

▲

abnercoimbre 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

It usually takes years for someone's values to be thrown out the window! How long was this one?

	▲	htrp 16 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it"
	▲	em-bee 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		changing your employer tends to accelerate that if the new employer has different values.

▲

vosper 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

How has it been trashed? Does the Bun software not work anymore?

▲

tedivm 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

They literally threw out every line of code that existed before and rewrote it in a completely different language, seemingly on a whim. That's how it was trashed, in the very literal sense that all of the existing project was tossed in the trash in favor of a completely brand new code base. That's a big deal even if you ignore the coding agent aspects.

▲

LoganDark 2 hours ago | parent [-]

The worst part is that they basically didn't review the new code at all other than making sure it passes tests. We have no idea what could be lurking in the codebase now, and it's even all completely un-idiomatic, Zig-ish Rust.

	▲	nullpoint420 an hour ago \| parent [-]
		I swear they did this as a marketing ploy. To set the precedent that these large refactors are okay to do, and ingrain it in the engineering zeitgeist.

▲

happytoexplain 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

>Does the Bun software not work anymore?

Nobody knows.