Introducing .NET Standard • Hacker News Board

Re: Introducing .NET Standard

#11

Post by 2bitencryption » Mon, Sep 26, 2016, 5:28 PM UTC

arenaninja wrote: post #3

In the last 10 years I wouldn't have bet on C# to be the language to be the most excited about, and yet here we are. Kudos for dealing with fragmentation

I started using Xamarin to develop an Android app, expecting the Xamarin platform to be some gross in-between which only exists to squeeze just a few more developers onto C#.

But, no joke, it's a BETTER experience than Android Studio. I had a much better time using Xamarin Studio (on OS X) and Visual Studio with Xamarin (on Windows) than I ever did with Android Studio. And not just because of the tools: C# provides so many great features that make Android development awesome on it. And the API is essentially the same as the true Android Java API; I found myself googling "start an activity on Android" rather than "Xamarin start an activity on Android" because it's all done the same way.

I normally don't obsess about my code looking clean and beautiful, but when I wrote my simple app in C# it shorter and easier to read than when I did it in the Android Studio.

Re: Introducing .NET Standard

#12

Post by 2bitencryption » Mon, Sep 26, 2016, 5:30 PM UTC

arenaninja wrote: post #3

In the last 10 years I wouldn't have bet on C# to be the language to be the most excited about, and yet here we are. Kudos for dealing with fragmentation

It looks like the old way of "MAKE them use it by making ourselves the only option" has given way to "Make them WANT to use it because if we don't they'll just use something else."

I am okay with this.

Re: Introducing .NET Standard

#13

Post by MichaelGG » Mon, Sep 26, 2016, 5:34 PM UTC

rch wrote: post #8

arenaninja wrote: post #3

In the last 10 years I wouldn't have bet on C# to be the language to be the most excited about, and yet here we are. Kudos for dealing with fragmentation

Excited? Having just inherited a previously outsourced ASP.NET MVC application, I feel like announcements like this ammount to tiny, tentative steps towards tolerable. Portability work should have started over a decade ago.

Portability work started nearly 2 decades ago. .NET has been multiplatform from the start. Around the first release they even had an "open" source version that ran on BSD, thought not with all the libraries.

Re: Introducing .NET Standard

#14

Post by runesoerensen » Mon, Sep 26, 2016, 5:35 PM UTC

jrudolph wrote: post #7

@runesoerensen: any plans to offer linux /.net core instances in AppHarbor (my favourite way to host .net apps by far!)?

Thanks for the kind words! You can actually run .NET Core apps already, but the tooling/CI story is still lagging (primarily because the .NET Core SDK is still in preview and needs to be updated to the revised .NET Core project/solution structure).

It's pretty straightforward to publish and deploy binaries from your own machine until the SDK graduates from preview and betas ("RTM" is expected later this year) -- take a look at this discussion for more details: https://support.appharbor.com/discussions/problems/79972-asp...

There are no current plans to offer Linux-based instances, but Windows Server 2016 will be available soon and brings some very exciting and long-awaited features to the table, that will be integrated in AppHarbor products as soon as possible. Stay tuned for more information on that :)

Re: Introducing .NET Standard

#15

Post by xori » Mon, Sep 26, 2016, 5:36 PM UTC

rch wrote: post #8

arenaninja wrote: post #3

In the last 10 years I wouldn't have bet on C# to be the language to be the most excited about, and yet here we are. Kudos for dealing with fragmentation

Excited? Having just inherited a previously outsourced ASP.NET MVC application, I feel like announcements like this ammount to tiny, tentative steps towards tolerable. Portability work should have started over a decade ago.

I think it's better to cheer loudly when we see a monolith move an inch. Better to say you're going the right way than to say you have a mile minus an inch to go.

Re: Introducing .NET Standard

#16

Post by Analemma_ » Mon, Sep 26, 2016, 5:38 PM UTC

I understand that Microsoft has to clean up a lot of legacy baggage around this ecosystem, and it does look like the way forward is much clearer and nicer, but man, was there any way this could've been done without another ".NET "? I'm still figuring out .NET Core/4.5/Framework and all the ASP naming zaniness... and I'm a .NET developer! I do trust Microsoft that this is really, truly the last time this will have to be done, but god it's a headache.

Re: Introducing .NET Standard

#17

Post by wodencafe » Mon, Sep 26, 2016, 5:39 PM UTC

Nothing about Linux, probably because there is no Linux Consumer Market. Looks like Microsoft's EEE strategy is alive and well.

This is nothing more than a clever ploy by Microsoft to regain control of C# from the community, becoming the gatekeeper of the new ".NET Standard" library... rather than opening up some of their coveted, proprietary codebase. (Winforms)

TL;DR Micro$oft being Micro$oft

Re: Introducing .NET Standard

#18

Post by rch » Mon, Sep 26, 2016, 5:39 PM UTC

xori wrote: post #15

rch wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Excited? Having just inherited a previously outsourced ASP.NET MVC application, I feel like announcements like this ammount to tiny, tentative steps towards tolerable. Portability work should have started over a decade ago.

I think it's better to cheer loudly when we see a monolith move an inch. Better to say you're going the right way than to say you have a mile minus an inch to go.

Last week I might have agreed with you, but it is really difficult when I'm actually dealing with this mess.

Re: Introducing .NET Standard

#19

Post by oblio » Mon, Sep 26, 2016, 5:41 PM UTC

wodencafe wrote: post #17

Nothing about Linux, probably because there is no Linux Consumer Market. Looks like Microsoft's EEE strategy is alive and well. This is nothing more than a clever ploy by Microsoft to regain control of C# from the community, becoming the gatekeeper of the new ".NET Standard" library... rather than opening up some of their coveted, proprietary codebase. (Winforms) TL;DR Micro$oft being Micro$oft

> rather than open up some of their coveted, proprietary codebase. (Winforms)

What makes you think that open sourcing WinForms would be any good? It's probably tied to Windows to the gills.

If anything, they should be doing something else, they should create or even better, support an existing UI toolkit and promote that as their cross platform UI.

Re: Introducing .NET Standard

#20

Post by oblio » Mon, Sep 26, 2016, 5:42 PM UTC

kennell wrote: post #10

bopcrane wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hope 'new Microsoft' continues to embrace open source and cross-platform - I'm very impressed and never would have imagined this direction a decade ago, either

They are going in the right direction but i feel like they still have a long way to go before people in the Linux/OSX world start taking C# seriously and we see actual products.

First of all they need to stabilize. There's still a lot of churn even for command line apps/server, let alone for making desktop apps.