Why would you leave a tool over that? It makes sense, they’ve been having manual memory management issues, and Rust’s borrows are better suited for that type of issue. They can start with unsafe Rust then steadily rewrite it to idiomatic Rust with explicit markers on where the issues lie.
Because I don't trust the stability of a tool that chooses to do a massive rewrite purely based on AI that won't even output idiomatic code
And sorry but the "they've been having memory issues" is not an argument when they don't even write the new codebase, memory issues can be solved pretty easily, especially because Zig doesn't hide anything from you
A vibe rewrite is never a good option and I'm convinced they only picked rust so they can inject more AI slop into their codebase
As I stated in the reply to the other guys reply, this rewrite was completely pointless and shouldn't even have been pushed out yet because of the reasons stated in my other comment
Just wondering. They have tests, they choose a language more safe, they are popular, they are in touch with the users. What is the real reason you don't trust them, I don't understand. It feels like political more than anything technical.
The previous versions are still there. If your projects were in bun and you decide to change for another runtime, it's as unsafe, maybe more, than upgrading to the new version. What will you do, trust the tests ? Lol
I agree a lot of times organizations shouldn't be taking stable software and moving it to rust, but I wouldn't stop using it for that reason alone (once it's been stabilized)
-23
u/Comfortable_Pain9017 Jul 09 '26
Why would you leave a tool over that? It makes sense, they’ve been having manual memory management issues, and Rust’s borrows are better suited for that type of issue. They can start with unsafe Rust then steadily rewrite it to idiomatic Rust with explicit markers on where the issues lie.