The whole code base is a vibe coded rewrite, half a year after Bun was acquired by Anthropic.

I see lots of ground for that claim.

I apologize, may I ask you, do you use Bun? If yes, you probably do monitor the development of this project (I do, it sounds reasonable to track your tools/deps), probably familiar with Jared's coding style, decision making process, architecture nuances, previous choices? Do you have any issues opened/closed in Bun's repo? Were you satisfied with contributors' reaction? Do you feel you can trust devteam behind Bun?

I get it if you're trying to defend your buddy, but at the end of the day it's on software to justify itself to me. Not for me (or parent poster) to justify their refusal.

Once bitten twice shy, y'know. Maybe the first bite wasn't even from bun. If bun can't take this on the chin and come back stronger, maybe bun wasn't a good choice to begin with. I'm sure a future version of bun with a rebuilt reputation will have an easy time getting re-adopted by most projects that needed to play it safe during the transition.

1 million lines of code in 7 days = ~6000 lines of code to be reviewed per hour, 24 hours per day.

or... they just trust that their ai got it right, which to most people is "vibe coding".

the speed of the rewrite and various analyses of the resultant codebase provide ample evidence that it was vibe coded and solid SWE practices were ignored

nobody understands the Bun Rust codebase. I wouldn't risk my business on code understood by no person. who is responsible? who will take accountability?

nobody. into the trash with it.

How can you claim following SWE best practices if couldn't realistically even have read the code?

"Please follow best practices."

You're telling me that isn't good enough? You might need to head off to the VC reeducation camps.

So transcoding doesn't work unless every line of code is read? That's not how transcoding is done in practice.

But the code that does the transcoding has been read.

Somebody needs to have read deterministic code to even have a chance of noticing something being wrong.

This has not happened here.

That's just agreeing with extra steps.

1 million lines of code written and approved, in 9 days proves without reasonable doubt it was vibe coded.

It was not ported by an engineer. It was transpiled by an LLM and no engineer has ever seen those 1mloc.

In 7 days?

What are you afraid of?

I'm afraid "we" tackle (agressively) the wrong problem, also making it's tough for the maintainers, who did nothing wrong (I have a lot of sympathy towards Bun's developers, they got a lot of ugly feedback within the last month). I don't think AI-written code is the problem at all. Human signs off the changeset the same way as it happened before. I don't care if Rust rewrite did happen using pipeline/harness and LLMs, if the maintainer takes responsibility, and in projects like Bun it happens "by default", I think.

I agree with you that AI-written code should not be a problem and tons of open-source projects have AI-written code right now. But do you really believe the way Bun rewrites and merges its code to master is the same as before? The change in rhetoric (from "don't overreact, it's just an experiment" to "merge it anyway"), the never-arrived blog post promised to explain the decision are concerning to me.

I really appreciate the maintainers' effort towards this awesome project. However, I think it is fair to be a little bit less confident with the current state of Bun.

A codebase that no human understands.