Bun.js can be used to build Electron-like apps, but it is not a direct replacement for Electron itself. There is a project called Electrobun, which is a framework that leverages Bun.js for building cross-platform desktop applications similar to Electron apps. Electrobun bundles Bun instead of Node.js for the main process, allowing developers to write TypeScript for both the main and browser contexts. Unlike Electron, Electrobun uses the system webview instead of bundling Chromium, making it more lightweight. It supports native bindings written in C/ObjC with a Zig wrapper running in the Bun process and offers features like code signing, update handling, and encrypted RPC between Bun and browser processes. This approach intends to offer an alternative to Electron that is smaller and potentially more efficient, but it is still in early stages focusing on stability and cross-platform support.
Electron uses Node.js and Chromium tightly integrated â Chromium's V8 JavaScript engine powers both the renderer and the Node.js environment. This integration is complex and necessary for Electron's core features, such as native modules and performant cross-process communication using the V8 serializer. Bun.js uses JavaScriptCore (JSC) as its engine rather than V8, causing compatibility issues since Node.js APIs and native modules are not fully supported by Bun. This makes Bun not API-compatible with Node.js, which is a significant hurdle for replacing Node.js in Electron. Additionally, Electron's reliance on Chromium's V8 for both engine and rendering makes it unlikely to swap Node for Bun without fancy workarounds, since it would require shipping two JavaScript runtimes (V8 and JSC) and increase bundle size significantly.
At the time of current information, Bun is still evolving and does not have full support for Node.js native abstractions such as N-API or NAN, which many Electron apps rely on for native modules. Therefore, running existing Electron apps purely on Bun isn't feasible yet. Discussions on GitHub and forums note that Bun is not seen as production-ready for complete Electron replacement or runtime substitution due to these compatibility gaps and integration challenges with Chromium.
To summarize the relationship and options:
- Building desktop apps with Bun.js directly requires frameworks like Electrobun, which replace Node.js in the Electron setup with Bun.js but don't bundle Chromium. Instead, they use operating system webviews, similar to Tauri. This reduces app size and overhead but may limit certain Electron features tied directly to Chromium.
- Electrobun allows writing desktop apps in TypeScript with Bun.js, providing binary update mechanisms, code signing, and native bindings via Zig.
- Electron itself is unlikely to replace Node.js with Bun due to dependency on V8, native module compatibility, and tight Chromium integration.
- For existing Electron apps, Bun.js is currently not a drop-in replacement because of API incompatibilities and lack of native module support.
- Projects aiming for lightweight desktop apps with modern JS runtimes and native bindings might look at Bun-based ecosystems or alternative frameworks rather than Electron.
Therefore, while Bun.js can be part of an ecosystem to build apps like Electron apps, it is not an official or full backend runtime replacement for Electron. Developers interested in Bun's speed and features can explore Electrobun or similar projects aiming to create cross-platform desktop apps with Bun at their core, potentially providing desktop app options lighter and different from Electron. Meanwhile, Electron continues to rely on Node.js and Chromium integration for its functionality and ecosystem compatibility.
This provides comprehensive insight into the current status and potential use of Bun.js for building Electron-like desktop applications.