Comment by kqp

2 days ago

Every single macOS update the top comments are about giving it six months to stabilize, but when a program’s biggest ever rewrite involves a lot of AI, the top comment is calling you irrational if you don’t YOLO it, and probably a jerk, too.

I didn't say you were irrational or a jerk.

But this also isn't a fair comparison. The article doesn't say "let's wait 6 months", it says they are fully deprecating Bun. Those are two very different statements. I would have had no issue with the first.

And FWIW I think my viewpoint is the uncommon one. Look at all the responses to a previous thread about it [1] and see how many of them are negative. It's certainly a majority.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48133519

YOLO? Bun has an extensive test suite and this implementation passed the test suite.

Can we at least try to be a bit more accurate and less hyperbolic?

I will continue to use Bun because the same people that made bun have made this decision. I trusted them one week ago. I have used bun for the past 2 years, and so have many others.

I'm not about to just assume they've become immature idiots yolo'ing stuff overnight. They're still the same people they were a week ago. Or two weeks ago.

  • Program testing can be used to show the presence of bugs, but never to show their absence! Dijkstra (1970) "Notes On Structured Programming"

    LLM generated code is garbage, not because it writes obvious errors. But because it lacks any kind of reasoning - Claude will gladly write you a solution for a problem you never had. Good luck fixing these kind of issues that will never be catched by tests.

  • >> same people that made bun have made this decision

    Are they the same people though? Their interests, goals, environment, incentives, boss etc etc all changed after they got acquired by Anthropic. Its not uncommon for a big company to acquire a smaller one and completely destroy that product to serve the parent company's goal.

    • You can go read all the details on Jarred's X account - including the progress, how it was thought out, strategy, that they're aware that it looks like zig still, etc etc etc.

      Speaking of environment though, everyone neglects to mention that the Bun core team now has access to Claude Mythos. You think they haven't already run Mythos against this? So they have private access to the best cybersecurity scanner known to man.

      Suffice to say, I'm yet to see anything that really worries me in any major way with this.

      5 replies →

  • > YOLO? Bun has an extensive test suite and this implementation passed the test suite.

    I'm sure macOS has an extensive test suite that Apple runs as well, and yet still people suggest waiting a bit before adopting a new macOS release.

    An extensive test suite can prove that you have regressions when you change the code, by showing you one or more newly-failing tests. However, it cannot prove that you don't have any regressions; it can only increase your confidence somewhat.

    • My argument wasn't that the test suite was perfect, my argument was that this is far from "YOLO" - this is a textbook example of being able to do bigger refactors, etc when you have an extensive test suite.

  • They can have 100% coverage for all I care, you don’t push 1 mil loc change and call it a day.

    > I'm not about to just assume they've become immature idiots yolo'ing stuff overnight. They're still the same people they were a week ago. Or two weeks ago.

    They’ve literally sold out to Anthropic.

  • Presumably MacOS has an extensive test suite that it is passing before each disastrous release. Tests matter, but they aren’t the entire story.

  • > this implementation passed the test suite

    Didn't they also change the tests to make the re-write pass?