I don't care about the language, but pre-releases the community don't get access to but released (Anthropic) applications do have access to, feels a bit too on the nose after the acquisition.

▲

atonse a day ago | parent [-]

The whole point of the outrage was that 1.4 was merged into main. Publicly. So I’m not sure what you mean.

Everything is in the open: PR #30412

▲

embedding-shape a day ago | parent | next [-]

> The whole point of the outrage

Ok, go ask those people what they think then, I feel no outrage over a project switching language or merging whatever. But when once-semi-transparent projects become more opaque after an acquisition, I'm starting to readjust anything to the project I had in mind.

▲

jdiff a day ago | parent | prev [-]

That PR is the rust rewrite. That's some time in the past now. As of this comment, there is no tagged 1.4 release. This is the present. Anthropic is using apparently a version of Bun that is not publicly available. This is orthogonal to it being Rust-based, as all Bun releases now will be.

▲

simonw a day ago | parent | next [-]

It's publicly available in the GitHub repository and if you run "bun upgrade --canary" - https://github.com/oven-sh/bun/releases/tag/canary

▲

jdiff a day ago | parent [-]

That commit (and main) still purports to be 1.3.14, the version numbers haven't changed. Does that not still suggest Anthropic is using something else?

	▲	simonw a day ago \| parent [-]
		I think Bun/Anthropic should document which commit hash their "1.4" as shipped in Claude Code uses.

▲

alexjurkiewicz a day ago | parent | prev [-]

Come on, "not publicly available"? You know how git works right? Each Claude release probably has the HEAD of main compiled as "1.4.0" until there is a real official release.

▲

queenkjuul 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The commit hash reported by "1.4" doesn't exist in the public repo

▲

jdiff a day ago | parent | prev [-]

I do know how git works and in my experience, while the version number sometimes doesn't get bumped until just before a release is tagged, the version number comes from the codebase. If they're building something that says 1.4.0, then they have a codebase that disagrees with ours.

	▲	Lerc a day ago \| parent [-]
		Where is the previous version referred to in the codebase? I'm guessing that would be the place to look for changes. If you can't find an update at that place in the codebase saying 1.4.0 you can ask where it is. It seems after doing that and not receiving an answer would be the appropriate time to start making the claims that people are throwing around. This seems like a candidate https://github.com/oven-sh/bun/commit/b18bf6d1d0a92238f240bf...