Piped

Great watch but to summarize:

  • Bun beats Node/Yarn for package installation

  • Somewhat better API/DX in some ways.

  • Loses poorly in testing performance

  • Tons of incompatibility issues/performance issues in other areas.

General summary: Just don’t use Bun yet, seems like it needs some more time in the oven.

    • MonkCanatella@sh.itjust.worksOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      1 year ago

      In my opinion, any advancement is worthwhile, even if current consensus is that it’s over-optimization. And if it starts tying up its loose ends, it’ll no doubt benefit node developers as well. Healthy competition and all that.

    • nnullzz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m with you on that. I’ve built dozens and dozens of node apps both professionally and for personal projects and yeah maybe the package installs could be faster, but the overall performance of the server has also been pretty good. If node is slow for you, maybe there’s some other optimizations to be made rather than switching the next new things as a solution.

  • tun@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Recently change node+npm+esbuild to bun runtime+package management+bundling and happy with the result.

    The project is a static site built with middleman, tailwind, postcss and some frontend libraries.

    It was simpler to work with for me. Node is way faster than ruby and so node speed was never an issue for me. But bun install is noticeably faster even for a small project.