The yt-dlp project uses Deno as its default and preferred JavaScript runtime when downloading YouTube videos (this replaced their own handwritten JS interpreter). Fortunately yt-dlp also has support for Node and QuickJS as well as deprecated support for Bun, but I don’t think any of those were preferred by the project for various reasons such as portability, security and I think also speed.

See https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp/issues/14404, https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp/issues/15012, and https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp/wiki/EJS.

▲

antalis 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

QuickJS works fine for yt-dlp and is way smaller: less than 1 MB vs 34 MB + its many dependencies for Deno.

See https://github.com/denoland/deno/discussions/9811

▲

bambax 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

For asynchronous downloading of huge media files, speed should not be a priority?

▲

lavela 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Afaik it's used more for circumventing anti-bot measures and solving challenges than the download handling itself.

	▲	toomuchtodo 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		This is accurate (maintainer of downstream project that depends on yt-dlp for archiving operations).

▲

antisthenes 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

When downloading huge media files, the only speed you're being limited by is your bandwidth.

Everything else is completely negligible.

▲

827a 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

As I recall, they picked Deno over Bun during the whole vibecoding rewrite fiasco from six months ago, and there wasn't a ton of explanation given beyond the general vibe of "ai bad". They might reevaluate that in light of things being generally fine and losing their precious handcoded runtime choice.

▲

stymaar 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> there wasn't a ton of explanation given beyond the general vibe of "ai bad"

I'm very bullish on AI, but vibe-porting the piece of software you're the main maintainer over a few weeks without letting anyone in the community know and pushing that as a fait accompli to both your userbase and your open source community is definitely the kind of behavior that makes you not trustworthy enough to depend on.

▲

swyx 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

as a counterpoint, your fears are hypothetical so far - nobody on earth cares as much about bun as the bun team and if it was good enough for them it is probably good enough for 99% of users

▲

inknight 4 hours ago | parent [-]

i think someone who has built their infra on top of bun and have bills to pay care much more about bun stability than the team who get paid by Anthropic to vibecode an entire rewrite to another lang

	▲	phoghed 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> someone who has built their infra on top of bun and have bills to pay they were stupid to do this in the first place. bun has always been a one man show. what were their plans for when he got hit by a bus?

▲

genxy 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

[flagged]

	▲	4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		[deleted]

▲

tech234a 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The vibecoded rewrite led to the deprecation of support for Bun but I believe Deno was already the default. Also Bun had the note “No permission restrictions available. Scripts have full file system and network access.”

▲

its-summertime 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

If I remember correctly, Deno was always priority number 1 due to having a permissions system. Bun's removal due to the rewrite had people complaining using Deno as the focus as Deno's development shifted towards being LLM heavy. Node now supporting permissions would likely be the priority now.

▲

tedivm 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

There was a ton of criticism beyond "ai bad". A complete rewrite, in a different language, is a brand new project. It doesn't have any where near the hardening as the previous version thousands of deployments. If they had done that exact same thing but without AI people still would have been upset.

▲

locknitpicker 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> As I recall, they picked Deno over Bun during the whole vibecoding rewrite fiasco from six months ago, and there wasn't a ton of explanation given beyond the general vibe of "ai bad".

Your comment is baffling. Either you lost track of the story or you've opted to post a very simplistic take on the whole Bun fiasco. Bun's ill-advised rewrite had zero technical grounds and the radical drop in release cadence in spite of all the AI backing suggests the project's foundation lays on shaky ground.