Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Announcing .NET Core 1.0

blogs.msdn.microsoft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 327 posts

Re: Announcing .NET Core 1.0

#311

Post by bad_user »

sxg wrote: post #264
ATsch wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is still opt-out, and thus considered harmful (at least by me)

If it were opt-in, they'd collect significantly less data, and the data they do collect would likely by heavily skewed. Microsoft could be misled by the poor quality of data collected, and an opt-in system could actually be worse than not collecting any data in the first place. The way I see it, at the end of the day, the decision for Microsoft is really between not collecting data and an opt-out system. If Microsoft…

Bullshit. Other companies manage to build quality products without opt-out tracking of their users just fine.

Re: Announcing .NET Core 1.0

#312

Post by smcl »

leecow wrote: post #184
smcl wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cool, thanks. Well the link on the page is somehow still not displaying this.

Sorry about that! Link should be fixed up shortly. Lee [.NET PM]

Thanks for sorting this. I'm a little embarrassed I complained on HN instead of raising an issue on GitHub or something :)

Re: Announcing .NET Core 1.0

#313

Post by rbanffy »

BHSPitMonkey wrote: post #208
kbenson wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep. Don't vote and nobody will care about your (unexpressed) needs when making decisions.

Well, it would be nice if there is a way to vote or express one's needs via some alternative to having one's usage actively mined for data.

You can always refrain to use their technology. There is plenty green grass in the neighboring fields.

Re: Announcing .NET Core 1.0

#314

Post by sxg »

bad_user wrote: post #311
sxg wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it were opt-in, they'd collect significantly less data, and the data they do collect would likely by heavily skewed. Microsoft could be misled by the poor quality of data collected, and an opt-in system could actually be worse than not collecting any data in the first place. The way I see it, at the end of the day, the decision for Microsoft is really between not collecting data and an opt-out system. If Microsoft…

Bullshit. Other companies manage to build quality products without opt-out tracking of their users just fine.

That doesn't refute my point. No data collection still leaves a greater probability of issues being left unresolved for a longer period of time. Also, the code is open source. You can see exactly what data is being collected.

To address your point, it's not possible to be aware of the benefits you're missing out on without data collection.

Re: Announcing .NET Core 1.0

#315

Post by hackaflocka »

oblio wrote: post #278
hackaflocka wrote: post #193

Is there a primer somewhere that explains simply what the difference and dependence is between .NET (core, foundation), ASP.NET (core, foundation), Xamarin, Visual Studio (in all it's different flavors including VS.NET etc.) and Visual Studio Code? I tried Wikipedia, and Microsoft's own homepages for each, and am even more confused. I'm a hierarchical thinker, and a hierarchical tree explaining the above would be ver…

Dotnet Foundation = NGO that manages various legal and org things for .NET. Think FSF for GNU. .NET Core = cross platform software development platform. Includes a VM, compiler, tons of libraries. ASP.NET Core = HTTP server + server side .NET libraries. There is no ASP.NET Foundation, it's all part of the Dotnet Foundation. Xamarin = .NET libraries for mobile development. Wraps Android/iOS native libraries. Visual St…

Thanks. Very helpful. Last 2 Qs: is Framework different from Core? And how does Windows Presentation Foundation fit in all this?

Re: Announcing .NET Core 1.0

#316

Post by louthy »

ngrilly wrote: post #154

A few years ago, I wouldn't have thought I would write this, but it looks like Microsoft is definitely changing, for the best! Two questions: - Does .NET Core offers something similar to Go goroutines or Erlang "lightweight" processes? - And something similar to gofmt?

Not out of the box, but this library does exactly that (with lots of functional niceness too). Disclaimer, I wrote it, so I'm obviously biased

https://github.com/louthy/language-ext

Re: Announcing .NET Core 1.0

#317

Post by BuckRogers »

oblio wrote: post #162
atrudeau wrote: post #126

If I'm an experienced Python developer who develops a lot of websites and APIs using Django or Flask and SQLAlchemy, is there any reason to try this stuff? C# is a great language, but what about the libraries? What replaces Flask? What replaces SQLAlchemy? How do I deploy? Looking for some practical reasons to invest time on this if Windows development is not in my roadmap.

Well, besides libraries, performance. .NET supports proper multithreading (no GIL) and it is also much faster than CPython. If IronPython gets ported to .NET Core (maybe it already has, I don't know), then you'd get those benefits for free.

For me, the GIL is a feature. Proper pthreading is for systems software as I see it. If you're rewriting Apache or IIS then you may need to bring in Rust, C(++).

I never found platforms like .Net and Java to be low level enough to write systems software, where you'd definitely want multithreading, and not high level enough to be as convenient as Python.

I write in Python and then use PyPy for more CPU intensive services. If I wanted multithreading and instances won't cut it, it would be a pretty hardcore usecase (for a lone wolf like me), I'd most likely also need no GC so I'd reach for something like Rust rather than C#.

I hate to say "no" to learning anything, but to be the devil's advocate this is how I've always seen it.

Re: Announcing .NET Core 1.0

#318

Post by ngrilly »

louthy wrote: post #316
ngrilly wrote: post #154

A few years ago, I wouldn't have thought I would write this, but it looks like Microsoft is definitely changing, for the best! Two questions: - Does .NET Core offers something similar to Go goroutines or Erlang "lightweight" processes? - And something similar to gofmt?

Not out of the box, but this library does exactly that (with lots of functional niceness too). Disclaimer, I wrote it, so I'm obviously biased https://github.com/louthy/language-ext

Just had a cursory look at the README. Is each lightweight process mapped to an OS thread? What is the minimal memory used by each lightweight process?

Re: Announcing .NET Core 1.0

#319

Post by oblio »

hackaflocka wrote: post #315
oblio wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dotnet Foundation = NGO that manages various legal and org things for .NET. Think FSF for GNU. .NET Core = cross platform software development platform. Includes a VM, compiler, tons of libraries. ASP.NET Core = HTTP server + server side .NET libraries. There is no ASP.NET Foundation, it's all part of the Dotnet Foundation. Xamarin = .NET libraries for mobile development. Wraps Android/iOS native libraries. Visual St…

Thanks. Very helpful. Last 2 Qs: is Framework different from Core? And how does Windows Presentation Foundation fit in all this?

.NET Framework is the old .NET Framework. It's basically the entire shebang, tied to Windows: VM, class libraries, etc.

.NET Core is as the name says, just the "core" of the .NET Framework, the part that's cross platform. However, I'm not sure that at this point the code's common, I believe at least a part of it has been reimplemented. I think that in the future .NET Framework will be based on .NET Core. Therefore .NET Framework will be .NET Core + Windows specific bits.

WPF is the fancy name for a .NET UI toolkit for Windows, basically. Think of it as a Windows-only GTK.

Re: Announcing .NET Core 1.0

#320

Post by louthy »

ngrilly wrote: post #318
louthy wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not out of the box, but this library does exactly that (with lots of functional niceness too). Disclaimer, I wrote it, so I'm obviously biased https://github.com/louthy/language-ext

Just had a cursory look at the README. Is each lightweight process mapped to an OS thread? What is the minimal memory used by each lightweight process?

It wraps the F# MailboxProcessor mentioned in a comment above. A thread is only allocated when a message is processed, and then free'd up afterwards. So there's no permanent thread overhead and 100,000s can be created.

The overhead in terms of memory is the internal state of each Process + the user's Process state. To see the internal overhead, check out the member variables for the Actor class [1].

It's pretty lightweight, although could probably shave a few bytes here and there.

[1] https://github.com/louthy/language-ext/blob/master/LanguageE...

Post reply on HN