Bun v1.3.9

Parallel and sequential, especially at the command level, are really the wrong abstractions for running scripts. If you have multiple packages, each with builds, there's a high chance you have dependencies and multiple packages depending on common ones.

What you really want is a way for scripts to describe their dependencies, and then the runner figures out what order to run them in, and cache scripts that don't need to be run because their inputs didn't change.

Wireit[1] is an npm script runner that adds that incrementally on top of package.json. I can't manage an npm monorepo without it now.

Deno started integrating the idea directly into their built-in script runner. I think this is an important enough feature that more runtimes should follow Deno's lead.

[1]: https://github.com/google/wireit

Well, that speeds things up a lot. But I agree with spankalee, it should be a DAG.

  < "ci": "CI=true bun run check && bun run test && bun run build && bun run docs && bun run zip && bun run zip:firefox"
  > "ci": "CI=true bun run --parallel check test build docs && bun run --parallel zip zip:firefox"

Is it more common in English to use there terms Parallel and Sequential or Parallel and Series ? Made a React Library to generate video as code and named two components <Parallel> <Series> I was wondering if those were two best terms two use...

Genuine question out of curiosity. Why do I want parallel and sequential when I can just write a simple bash script to accomplish the same thing? Is there some additional complexity I’m missing?

This is nice to see, but I'm curious to check if the web socket bugs are all gone (I had a watch on a particular one that stopped me from running Node-RED in some circumstances, but can't find it on mobile...)

Why does Anthropic even need Bun? Is Claude not good enough to write something far superior very fast?