In my experience the real answer is almost always "just don't do that other stuff". Most of the complexity Postgress is claiming to fix here doesn't need to exist in the first place.
Why I've moved more to a couple of language/software dev discords and away from Hacker News. Way too much uninteresting AI nonsense on here for a while now.
That and the continual pushing of Zig and Rust to ridiculous levels, like HN had investments in them or were getting payouts, and as if few to no other programming languages exist.
On a semi-related note, I bought a Pixel phone about a month ago, and I'm shocked by how unpolished it is. I've had so many little annoyances pop up, issues I never had on other android phones. Keyboard hiding/appearing when it's not suppose to, bluetooth dropping, WiFi dropping, network switching taking forever, screen becoming unresponsive... It's mostly all small things, but they really start to add up after a while.
Rust didn't have nearly the industry adoption it does now back in 2020, but it was gaining traction in various parts of the community. If you learned it back then it was either because you love it, or you thought it had staying power.
I think Zig does, specifically because of its build system and it's C interopt story. Plus Zig has the added advantage that learning it teaches you about how the computer works, how memory gets laid out, etc. So even if it never gets wide adoption the skills are highly transferable.
Can't. It's a worse case scenario. It got vibe coded but I don't have access to AI tools to undo it. Basically the company was running a test on some tools, one engineer went ham and the thing ended up getting used, then the company decided to drop the ban hammer on the tools.
I have a lot of respect for Andrew, and I really enjoy Zig, but God that interview was awful. Andrews answers were fine, but the whole thing felt very sycophantic.
There's a lot of little things that just added up, but I think the clearest example was the exchange regarding Andrew's pay from the foundation. I don't have an issue with him being paid for the work, or the amount he's taking, I would be surprised if anyone really did, but the way the interview asked the question came off as "Oh you're only making x? You should be paid so much more", and Andrew even commented in it saying "...it sounds like you're implying I deserve more...". I'm of course paraphrasing, but that's the impression I walked away with.
The questions also had a tendency to be somewhat shallow. There were a lot of places where it felt like the interviewer was queuing Andrew to respond to criticism or explain controversial choices made for the language or tool chain, but the interviewer doesn't really follow up on them are point out what the issues might be.
It might have been expectations I guess. I was hoping for an interesting technical interview and instead it seemed like a fluff piece.
As far as I'm concerned Bun has been extremely irresponsible with this entire rewrite, and it calls into question their entire development philosophy. Any project that cares about stability and reliability should steer clear of Bun for a while.
