Cruller: Bun's Zig Runtime, Continued on Zig 0.16

Discussion (8 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews

andai•about 1 hour ago

There seems to be some confusion here (including in the linked discussion?) about what this is. This is not continuing the development on the original Bun (Zig) codebase.

It is extracting a subset of that codebase for deployment purposes. The full version of Bun (presumably in Rust?) will continue to be used for actual development.

So it is not a replacement for Bun, but a supplement to it.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49018157

pjmlp•about 1 hour ago

As usual, most forks created out of community rupture eventually die.

muppetman•9 minutes ago

I feel bad for Zig. The desperation to remain relevant now that Bun’s gone. There’s still Ghostty (which I love) and... I’m sure there’s a second thing :(

pdpi•2 minutes ago

TigerBeetle is the other canonical example.

kshri24•4 minutes ago

> The desperation to remain relevant now that Bun’s gone

Huh? Zig was never dependent on Bun for being relevant. Tigerbeetle, for example, is written in Zig.

holysantamaria•about 1 hour ago

What makes Bun Bun is all the things that got removed from this project. Node is already powerful enough and well maintained. Why would anyone use this?

dgellow•about 1 hour ago

> The main design decision is to treat this as a runtime, not a general-purpose Bun replacement. A minimal launcher loads a pre-built entrypoint; features that require package installation, bundling, TypeScript transformation, or bun test are intentionally outside the scope.

The author is saying explicitly they don’t want to make a Bun replacement

Copenjin•about 1 hour ago

Heroic effort, sifting through that code I mean, but frankly I would have started a new one from scratch, the only thing of value is the name/popularity of the original project.

Cruller: Bun's Zig Runtime, Continued on Zig 0.16

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion (8 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews