Bun: Fast JavaScript runtime, transpiler, and NPM client written in Zig

Re:Bun: Fast JavaScript runtime, transpiler, and NPM client ... by picozeta on Wednesday July 06, 2022 @04:23AM (#31998200)

Nice, but using a memory unsafe language in a web context is too risky in my opinion.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Bun: Fast JavaScript runtime, transpiler, and NPM client ... by Etheryte on Wednesday July 06, 2022 @05:24AM (#31998595)

Does that mean you also avoid using Chrome, Firefox, Node, etc?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Bun: Fast JavaScript runtime, transpiler, and NPM client ... by picozeta on Wednesday July 06, 2022 @12:06PM (#32002956)

No, because I have to.

But there are many capable languages to develop memory save web applications (Haskell, Go, Rust, Java, Python, TypeScript, Elm, Clojure, ...), so why would one choose one that's not save?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Bun: Fast JavaScript runtime, transpiler, and NPM client ... by Etheryte on Wednesday July 06, 2022 @02:59PM (#32005272)

For starters, Go is not even memory safe. That aside, there are many reasons to choose a different language, memory safety is only one of very many tradeoffs that you make when choosing your tooling. In Bun's example, extreme performance has been achieved which no comparable alternative provides. Neither performance nor memory safety are "better" or "worse" by themselves, it's a matter of which tradeoffs you choose.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Bun: Fast JavaScript runtime, transpiler, and NPM client ... by postalrat on Wednesday July 06, 2022 @03:26PM (#32005604)

Did you want to say (Rust) but felt compelled to list more?

Can Java, Python, Typescript, Elm, or Clojure even be consider memory safe since they are run on VMs or interpreters that might not be memory safe?

[ Parent | on HN ]