> The whole point of the outrage
replyOk, go ask those people what they think then, I feel no outrage over a project switching language or merging whatever. But when once-semi-transparent projects become more opaque after an acquisition, I'm starting to readjust anything to the project I had in mind.
That PR is the rust rewrite. That's some time in the past now. As of this comment, there is no tagged 1.4 release. This is the present. Anthropic is using apparently a version of Bun that is not publicly available. This is orthogonal to it being Rust-based, as all Bun releases now will be.
replyIt's publicly available in the GitHub repository and if you run "bun upgrade --canary" - https://github.com/oven-sh/bun/releases/tag/canary
replyThat commit (and main) still purports to be 1.3.14, the version numbers haven't changed. Does that not still suggest Anthropic is using something else?
replyI think Bun/Anthropic should document which commit hash their "1.4" as shipped in Claude Code uses.
replyCome on, "not publicly available"? You know how git works right? Each Claude release probably has the HEAD of main compiled as "1.4.0" until there is a real official release.
replyI do know how git works and in my experience, while the version number sometimes doesn't get bumped until just before a release is tagged, the version number comes from the codebase. If they're building something that says 1.4.0, then they have a codebase that disagrees with ours.
replyWhere is the previous version referred to in the codebase? I'm guessing that would be the place to look for changes.
replyIf you can't find an update at that place in the codebase saying 1.4.0 you can ask where it is. It seems after doing that and not receiving an answer would be the appropriate time to start making the claims that people are throwing around.
This seems like a candidate
https://github.com/oven-sh/bun/commit/b18bf6d1d0a92238f240bf...
The commit hash reported by "1.4" doesn't exist in the public repo
reply