[mmastrac]

One of the most fascinating things to fall out of the AI apocalypse is seeing how abundant AI access amplifies the qualities of a company.

IMO, Deno has always been more methodical, more focused (maybe too focused?) on standards. But now the Deno team is on the right track: using Claude extensively to improve the node.js compat which was absolutely herculean if not impossible before AI. [+]

On the other hand, Bun has always played a bit fast and loose, chasing metrics at the cost of stability. Access to abundant AI has sent that project off the rails.

Disclaimer: Former Deno engineer - I'm obviously going to have some biases. All IMO of course, but if you ask me I'd still bet on Deno in the long term, and I personally still use it for any .ts projects.

[+] There might be a dozen people in the world that know how sensitive and subtle the timing and ordering in the JS event loop is and how meticulous just this single part needs to be for major node.js projects not to completely crap themselves.

[steve_adams_86]

You're touching on something I've been thinking about a lot lately. There's this notion that LLMs only increase volume and there's an inevitable intrinsic decline in quality. In reality, it's more like an amplifier as you mentioned; people interested in good engineering can iterate more deeply and focus more intently on specific problems than they could, and they aren't inherently forced to output more garbage.

It's one of the ways in which I find people overwhelmingly misunderstand how LLMs will impact our field. The glut of awful garbage is no different from when people started selling startup 'starter packs' and such; it's just even more accessible and more widespread. There's still no easy or immediate replacement for curiosity, a need for quality, domain knowledge, etc.

I agree that the Deno team exemplifies that and it's why I trust their work for my own work.