> Demonstrably by this 1.0 bun release it seems safe to say it ended up being a fine decision, no?

That’s just a decision they’ve made themselves. I honestly think it’s an interesting question: can software built on a <1.0 base legitimately call itself 1.0? What if there are big underlying issues discovered within Zig?

Well sure, it can legitimately call itself anything. You are wondering if Bun’s standards for 1.0 match up with the standards for 1.0 that you have in your head, but of course only you can answer that.

I don't see why not. 1.0 would mean the API isn't changing. And they can certainly swap out the language and still keep the API the same.