zig-okredis VS bun

> I don't really understand your crusade.

Accuracy is important in the marketplace of ideas, and especially in programming. Software is too buggy already, and it would only add more bugs to have programmers not understand the languages they use.

> I made this same observation in the past, it never satisfied you.

Yes, you made that same observation, and I appreciate that. But as @kbd so unintentionally demonstrated, people still believe that Zig is colorless. I want to dispel that notion completely.

I think you are not adding to the problem, and that is great. But the notion is still there.

> Your blog post is full of wrong information. I tried to explain to you what was wrong when you first posted it (so you can refer to those comments, if you want), but you keep seeing this as some kind of philosophical debate, and I have no interest in having this debate.

Here is all of the comments you made on Hacker News on the comments [1] about my blog post.

> That's exactly it. It just enables code reuse. You still have to think about how your application will behave, but you won't have to use an async-flavored reimplementaion of another library. Case in point: zig-okredis works in both sync and async applicatons, and I don't have to maintain two codebases.

> https://github.com/kristoff-it/zig-okredis

> I thought using "colorblind" in the title of my original blogpost would be a clear enough hint to the reader that the colors still exist, but I guess you can never be too explicit.

and

> That's how it works in Zig. Calling an async function like this will also await it.

The closest thing to "explain[ing] to [me] what was wrong when [I] first posted it" is probably that first comment, which was in reply to

> I may be totally wrong with this assumption, but the way I understoo[d] Zig's color-less async support is that the compiler either creates a "red" or "blue" function body from the same source code based on how the function is called (so on the language level, function coloring doesn't matter, but it does in compiler output).

> The compiler still needs to stamp out colored function bodies because the generated code for a function with async support needs to look different - the compiler needs to turn the code into a state machine instead of a simple sequence).

> It's a bit unfortunate that red and blue functions appear to have a different "ABI signature", but I guess that's needed to pass an additional context pointer into a function with async support (which would otherwise be the implicit stack pointer).

(Original comment at [2] by flohofwoe.)

So if anybody explained anything, it's flohofwoe.

But flohofwoe's comment goes directly against the the language reference, so it's hard for me to believe.

The language reference says that sync functions are turned async if they call async functions. This implies virality of async on functions, which implies that many functions are definitely async-only.

If the compiler does something different, which it would have to if it actually makes two different versions of each function, then the language reference is wrong. Like I said, accuracy matters, so I would also like to see changes in the Zig language reference about this if that's the case.

> As I said to you already in the past, I just write software with Zig async and it works.

Yes, you write working software in Zig async, but you understand it better than most. People who go to the language reference and write based on that may not be able to write working software with Zig async as easily as you.

[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30965805

[2]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30967070

It has a decent compatibility with both Jest and Vitest's APIs (you can track progress here so you can use it as almost a drop-in replacement for either. Just as Node's, it has describe/it, mock, test and others, but with the expect syntax (which I find more readable). For example:

In this third and final article in the series on HTML Streaming, we will explore the practical implementation of the Diff DOM Streaming library in web browsing. This approach will allow any website using web components to retain its state during browsing. We will discuss in detail how to achieve this step by step using VanillaJS and Bun.

At Node Conference 2023, Jarred Sumner (creator of Bun) showed a demo of server components in Bun, so there is at least partial support in that ecosystem. The Bun repo provides bun-plugin-server-components as the official plugin for server components. And while I haven’t looked at it in-depth, Marz claims to be a “React Server Components Framework for Bun”.

Continuously evolving, Bun is currently optimized for MacOS and Linux, with ongoing efforts towards Windows compatibility. Tailored for resource-constrained environments like serverless functions, it emerges as an ideal solution. The Bun team is committed to achieving comprehensive Node.js compatibility and seamless integration with prevalent frameworks. For those intrigued by Bun's potential and want to give it a try, more information is available on its website at https://bun.sh/.

Let’s say you are interested in learning more about Bun and probably give it a try. Bun has a website, where you can learn more about Bun and its features (including all the benchmark data captured in this issue), and here is the link.

Looks like it, it seems the 2% are mostly odd platform specific issues that the authors' did not deem very important (my assumption for the release happening anyway). AFAIK this[1] PR tries to fix them.

[1]: https://github.com/oven-sh/bun/pull/9729

Bun has a solution for it. First of all, it already has a list of trusted dependencies. For them, Bun will execute all necessary scripts by default. Otherwise, you can add it to trustedDependecies in your package.json file. In Bun community usage of trustedDependencies is a hot topic. There are several suggestions on how to improve it.

Install Node.js (or Bun, or Deno, or whatever JS runtime you prefer) if it's not there

I think maybe I was unclear. I'm talking about writing libraries that abstract across these differences and provide a single API, as sibling describes. I already know it's possible. I made a simple filesystem abstraction here[0] and a very simple HTTP library that uses it here[1]. They both work in Node/Deno and the browser. Unfortunately I ran into issues with Bun's slice implementation[2]. But I suspect there's a much better way of detecting and using the different backends.

[0]: https://github.com/waygate-io/fs-js

[1]: https://github.com/waygate-io/http-js

[2]: https://github.com/oven-sh/bun/issues/7057