comments (10)

  • Drilling into the original article where Jarred explained the reasoning behind the change, It's pretty clear that under zig the team was doing things by hand that are automatic in rust.

    Humans and agents share one thing: they are both non-deterministic. He talks about the issue of tracking memory lifecycles manually in zig so it can be explicitly freed. As expected, this leads to a long list of bugs where people missed things.

    Rust does this automatically. It removes an entire class of errors from his backlog. From an engineering management perspective, this looks like a pretty good trade.

    The bonus here is that compiler errors are exactly the kind of deterministic guardrail you need to put around coding agents. Claude works really well if you give it a way to test for correctness and "make it compile" is a pretty good target.

    There's a general version of this: the artifact you expose plus the test you run on it. Deterministic tests turn stochastic output into a hard guarantee. Wrote it up here if useful: https://michael.roth.rocks/blog/verification-surface/

    mrothroc

  • Bah.

    Personally my take on the entire affair is quite negative, whatever Jarred or Simonw says about it.

    I think Bun owned by Anthropic and the entire rewrite with AI is not the real point (even if it's quite interesting, though).

    My take is that Jarred, and Bun,didn't demonstrate a serious, adult approach, from "this is my branch, you are overreacting" message to just proceeding with a 1mil+ PR merged in less than month.

    The communication is the issue, and it was handled very badly, in a way that impacted trust and divisions.

    Was it so difficult to adopt the approach that the TS team adopted for 7.0?

    gabrieledarrigo

  • > For me this outputs Bun v1.4.0 (macOS arm64). The most recent release of Bun on GitHub is currently v1.3.14 from May 12th, so that v1.4.0 version number in Claude supports them shipping a preview of a not-yet-released Bun version.

    And so, the FOSS project "Bun" silently dies in darkness and is now something completely else. I'm glad I still had "Investigate if Bun is worth it" on my TODO list and hadn't yet gotten to it.

    What is the governance structure for Bun by the way? Couldn't find any documents/explanations about how it's supposed to work. I'm guessing it's essentially just "Anthropic decides what gets done and accepted" today?

    embedding-shape

  • Maybe I’m taking crazy pills, but I’m still stuck on “why the hell does a TUI need to run in terminal React by way of JavaScript”

    The fact that Anthropic felt the need to buy a runtime so they could make their TUI better speaks more to the quality of engineering than anything else IMO.

    If rewrites are so easy, why not rewrite CC in a native language? Would’ve been a hell of a lot cheaper.

    weakfish

  • Why all the mess with Bun?

    Couldn't they have rewritten Claude Code in Rust directly? No more need for a JS runtime, better performance, etc... If their agents can do Zig to Rust, why not JS to Rust?

    GuB-42

  • All the emotion of speculations aside, how it runs? It boots faster yeah, but what about RAM and CPU usage? Weird dead loop or dead locks?

    If it run as good as before or even better, then that's kinda impressive.

    I'm a developer so I really don't like it when AI might took my job, but if everyone on this planet could create a software for themselves exactly as how they wanted with just a few simple demands, that will change the world for the better.

    Think of it as a democratization of technology. You don't want Microsoft stealing your data? Just ask a AI to write an OS for you. You don't want Google to listen to what you're saying? Just ask a AI to design a phone for you. If one day the AI ended up doing that, it will be the ultimate technology self-sufficient. In front of that, your job security is insignificant.

    It is also why keeping the tech open source is that much important. Otherwise, it's still the same old shit again and again, and, you lose your job too.

    nirui

  • Maybe I'm taking crazy pills, but I swore there have been very similar comments I've seen as the current top post by weakfish:

    > Maybe I’m taking crazy pills, but I’m still stuck on “why the hell does a TUI need to run in terminal React by way of JavaScript”

    > The fact that Anthropic felt the need to buy a runtime so they could make their TUI better speaks more to the quality of engineering than anything else IMO.

    > If rewrites are so easy, why not rewrite CC in a native language? Would’ve been a hell of a lot cheaper.

    It turns out, there's some similar sentiments in the last year ish:

    https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47043325

    https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47105720

    https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48001113

    https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46134570

    https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46124596

    I'm not a fan of any of the technologies, companies, or people related to this. I just couldn't shake the feeling that I've seen similar comments.

    September and all.

    harrisi

  • Anecdotal, but I’ve been getting segfaults in Claude Code. I run inside Kitty tabs, and the entire tab becomes unusable when this happens. No response to inputs at all from that point.

    When this happens, a link shows up to report the issue. It’s not clickable (likely due to the segfault), and perhaps more important: it’s encoded, so you can’t see what you would be sending in your report.

    Hope it gets better.

    Aeveus

  • It's a transpile. And not even a good one. The generated code is far from idiomatic rust. Some may consider it an abomination.

    feverzsj

  • Incidentally, Claude Code has been very buggy for me lately (much more so than before). Lots of TUI rendering issues causing, e.g., the conversation history to be garbled etc.

    codethief