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

Introducing .NET Standard

blogs.msdn.microsoft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 154 posts

Re: Introducing .NET Standard

#51

Post by oblio »

sillysaurus3 wrote: post #23
Analemma_ wrote: post #16

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…

http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000339.html

That only applies if your ecosystem is the hype-du-jour.

.NET is massive, it is entrenched, but I doubt it is growing.

So "fire and motion" doesn't apply here.

Re: Introducing .NET Standard

#52

Post by forgotAgain »

ihsw wrote: post #35
mbesto wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does anyone have a breakdown of how .NET Core/4.5/MVC/etc interact, are different, etc?

.Net Core: cross-platform build tooling, minimal API .Net Standard: cross-platform comprehensive API .Net 4.5: Windows-only build tooling + comprehensive API .Net MVC: Windows-only web framework built on .Net 4+

From the OP: ".NET Standard is a set of APIs that all .NET platforms have to implement. This unifies the .NET platforms and prevents future fragmentation.

Sounds like baseline API that will be present on all .Net .

Re: Introducing .NET Standard

#53

Post by terrajobst »

Analemma_ wrote: post #16

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…

I fully share your concerns. I've expressed this problem with a homage to XKCD:

https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/dotnet/2014/12/04/introduci...

Don't think of .NET Standard as another .NET platform. Think of it as the standard that ties them all together. It's similar in spirit to POSIX. It's not another Unix, it's a way to write code that works on multiple Unixes.

Re: Introducing .NET Standard

#54

Post by wodencafe »

oblio wrote: post #19
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.

I agree, QT or GTK# would be a good start :)

Re: Introducing .NET Standard

#55

Post by aikah »

euroclydon wrote: post #33

I lead a .NET development team, and I have no plans start using Core any time soon. That's based on my experience testing it out -- just too different, too based on a myriad of nuget packages (which is too much like NPM for me). This confirms my decision. I'm sure it will be nice once it's all sorted out. The money quote for me is below: Since our goal was to represent any .NET platform we had to break it up into sma…

> and I have no plans start using Core any time soon.

It doesn't matter what your plans are. If Microsoft forces you to move on to something like .NET Core you will. Eventually, when it comes to ASP.NET there will no difference between the core and the non core version.

Re: Introducing .NET Standard

#56

Post by geldan »

Delmania wrote: post #50
pjmlp wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I still don't understand how Microsoft was able to provide a better debugging and tooling experience for Android, than Google itself for their own OS, although Android Studio 2.2 finally seems to be usable.

> I still don't understand how Microsoft was able to provide a better debugging and tooling experience for Android, than Google itself for their own OS, although Android Studio 2.2 finally seems to be usable. Visual Studio was first released in 1997, the company has 20 years experience in designing and building tooling. I believe they also have a very firm dogfooding policy, and some very intelligent people work ther…

Except browser tooling, where they are far ahead of others.

Re: Introducing .NET Standard

#57

Post by mohdmasd »

I don't understand this bit:

"In order to allow .NET Framework 4.6.1 to support .NET Standard 2.0, we had to remove all the APIs from .NET Standard that were introduced in .NET Standard 1.5 and 1.6."

Does this mean that STD 2.0 will support .NET 4.6.1 but not 4.6.2 ?

Re: Introducing .NET Standard

#58

Post by mellinoe »

bmurphy1976 wrote: post #21

I can't really make heads or tails of this, it's still fairly complicated and I'm just not invested enough in it to read everything with a fine toothed comb. What I want to know is, will the sync (not async/await) methods be available on Linux on .NET Core? We've been struggling with that, the move to async/await is a major rewrite of our legacy application codebase and for what we do Mono has been a constant thorn i…

> What I want to know is, will the sync (not async/await) methods be available on Linux on .NET Core?

Yes, they most likely will be. If you search through the reference assembly interfaces listed here, you should be able to tell whether the functionality you want will be available.

https://github.com/dotnet/standard/tree/master/netstandard/r...

For things like legacy synchronous or Begin/End async methods, we are more or less adding them wholesale to the standard. If something like that is still missing, then it's most likely an accidental omission rather than a conscious removal.

(I work on .NET at Microsoft).

Re: Introducing .NET Standard

#60

Post by pjmlp »

Delmania wrote: post #50
pjmlp wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I still don't understand how Microsoft was able to provide a better debugging and tooling experience for Android, than Google itself for their own OS, although Android Studio 2.2 finally seems to be usable.

> I still don't understand how Microsoft was able to provide a better debugging and tooling experience for Android, than Google itself for their own OS, although Android Studio 2.2 finally seems to be usable. Visual Studio was first released in 1997, the company has 20 years experience in designing and building tooling. I believe they also have a very firm dogfooding policy, and some very intelligent people work ther…

Surely a few of those PhDs able to draw inverted tree algorithms on the whiteboard should be capable of producing a proper IDE that doesn't hang the computer all the time, an OS simulator and get their mind around how to have an actual working build system for NDK users.
Post reply on HN