Adding bespoke animations via Claude Code to the blog post is definitely thematic. It's unclear if they're useful data visualizations as they take a bit of time to parse, but they're neat.

One thing that I found interesting is that most of the discourse surrounding the topic happened with the assumption that the rewrite was happening with an Opus-like model, and not with Fable. Those assumptions, at least partially, were used as arguments against the fact that the rewrite was feasible and/or a good idea.

Clearly the model itself doesn't completely change the narrative, but at least as a note to myself, I would like to be more careful with assuming the capabilities of the models used internally by Anthropic and affiliated orgs.

As expected [0] [1], this was a clear advertisement / marketing opportunity of Anthropic's Fable model on rewriting Bun (which powers Claude Code) from Zig into Rust.

Something that would have taken hundreds of developers now took 1 developer with Fable.

Now Claude, rewrite Claude Code from TypeScript to Rust. Make absolutely zero mistakes.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48073893

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48240829

Without commenting on Bun itself as a project, or the nature of the rewrite, it can't be good for Zig that a naive rewrite away from it fixed memory leaks, improved stability, shrunk binary size by 20%, and improved performance by 5%.

You can see the size difference in the number of files https://app.principal-ade.com/oven-sh/bun

> Claude Code v2.1.181 (released June 17th) and later use the Rust port of Bun.

It seems the reports of Bun's death have been greatly exaggerated.