Hacker News Reader

Comment by locknitpicker | Hacker News Reader

> What are you talking about?

I think GP was pointing out how bun's release cadence stalled and the project is going nowhere at the moment.

The project was pretty healthy up to 1.13.14, but since may they stopped shipping anything.

That's quite odd for a project that just went through a major rewrite and is lauded as being developed primarily by LLM coding assistants.

Personally I expected the release cadence was going to go through the roof, but instead it flat lined.

View on HN

So they are being more cautious and spending more time on polish after a never been done before historical massive rewrite...? Stop the press! They are not shipping as fast they used to! Omg!

> So they are being more cautious and spending more time on polish after a never been done before historical massive rewrite...?

That's not credible at all. I mean, after a major release there are tons of low-priority low-hanging fruit issues that can be quickly sorted out. That's the nature of a release process.

However, Bun stopped releasing anything. Even after lauding it's AI push,which can easily chomp through small tickets.

It's been a couple of months since the major push. I repeat: the release cadence of a mature, stable codebase as the Zig one was at 2-3 weeks. A messy rust rewrite packed with unsafe code, which is prime ground for small bugfixes and correctness fixes, led the project to grind to a halt.

No one looks good in the picture.

Boo hoo https://bun.com/blog/bun-v1.4

Pretty sure that’s because of the backlash. So, sounds like a good thing people voiced their concerns

I wouldn't consider it particularly surprising that a big rewrite results in no new releases for a bit before the rewritten version is released.

Not surprising, but Jarred has been teasing "tomorrow I swear" for months and Bun keeps missing his own deadlines.

There's clearly something wrong in their confidence about Rust Bun: If it isn't ready they should have said "whenever it's done", and if it is they'd have met some deadline by now. I suspect the speed was supposed to be part of the stunt, yet they seem to have encountered the 90:90 rule.

Isn't supposed to be faster with LLMs?

The rewrite was a lot faster. Actually shaking out the bugs from the rewrite (or just getting enough confidence in the new version from use by early adopters) is probably not going to be drastically faster.

Then it's not a net speed gain?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com