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

Let's stop bashing C#

codeaddiction.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–99 of 99 posts

Re: Let's stop bashing C#

#91

Post by denfromufa »

sametmax wrote: post #21
nawtacawp wrote: post #6

If the author wants credibility about bashing C# perhaps they should not generalize other languages within their argument. Can C# not stand on its own merits? As someone who has been using Python for nesrly two decades --How is the author defining 'hipster' languages?

What's more, Python is usually quite appreciated in the .Net community. It's a first class citizen on Azure, it used to have a .Net port (IronPython) and one of the current trending github project for C# is one allowing Python interoperability ( https://github.com/trending/c%23 ) It's like a grandpa getting angry alone in front of his mirror.

I would say it is in both directions ;)

Re: Let's stop bashing C#

#92

Post by denfromufa »

jeffrand wrote: post #54

I've spent the last 4 months writing a C# web service on .NET Core and deploy on Linux. We chose it because it was the right tool for the job. We're consuming a verbose WCF web service and there were some unique benefits to doing it in a .NET language. I've been primarily using python for the last couple of years so it's been a really interesting experience. Here are some of my thoughts: - The language itself is real…

.NET is highly backwards compatible, so why does "10+ year of answers to the same questions" matter to you?

Re: Let's stop bashing C#

#93

Post by cryptarch »

rikkus wrote: post #47
cryptarch wrote: post #35

.NET Core isn't packaged for Debian, Fedora and CentOS, and for Ubuntu you have to add a separate PPA. That makes it an instant no-go for me. I'm not a software packager and I'm not becoming one to try new and unstable C# tooling. Visual Studio Community was a pretty terrible experience and I don't intend to spend more of my time on unreliable Microsoft products.

While there aren't necessarily native packages pre-built and ready to pull down with the installers, you don't need to be a 'software packager' to install .NET Core and I don't know what the problem is with 'add[ing] a separate PPA' Instructions for Debian[1], Fedora[2], Centos[3] and Ubuntu[4]. These all seem like pretty simple copy+paste instructions. [1] https://www.microsoft.com/net/core#linuxdebian [2] https://w…

I don't want 3rd party repositories to manage. To do it properly I have to (in the case of Debian) trust some MS team's signing keys (yuck), add the repo and update my apt-pinning rules (I don't want apt accidentally installing MS versions of tools) and integrate this in my dev OS build automation.

That vs. adding a single line in my list of selected packages. The price to adoption is high and it's just not worth it to me, especially seeing how immature the tooling and overall ecosystem is.

Re: Let's stop bashing C#

#94

Post by cryptarch »

GordonS wrote: post #76
cryptarch wrote: post #35

.NET Core isn't packaged for Debian, Fedora and CentOS, and for Ubuntu you have to add a separate PPA. That makes it an instant no-go for me. I'm not a software packager and I'm not becoming one to try new and unstable C# tooling. Visual Studio Community was a pretty terrible experience and I don't intend to spend more of my time on unreliable Microsoft products.

Just recently they started releasing statically linked, distro-agnostic binaries.

And that's exactly what I don't want.

I choose to trust Debian maintainers; I don't choose to trust Microsoft.

If the package ends up in Debian stable, its pretty much guaranteed to be stable and to at least install and uninstall cleanly and consistently; it also won't have builtin telemetry because that's Not Done in the Debian distribution.

With the beta stuff provided by Microsoft there's no reason for me to assume a similar level of diligence.

Re: Let's stop bashing C#

#95

Post by cryptarch »

enibundo wrote: post #37
cryptarch wrote: post #35

.NET Core isn't packaged for Debian, Fedora and CentOS, and for Ubuntu you have to add a separate PPA. That makes it an instant no-go for me. I'm not a software packager and I'm not becoming one to try new and unstable C# tooling. Visual Studio Community was a pretty terrible experience and I don't intend to spend more of my time on unreliable Microsoft products.

What do you code in normally?

A GNU/Linux distro + vim usually, with some Docker and shell scripts/make for the build process. Very transparent and everything can be versioned in Git.

Kinda the opposite of IDE-centric development, but the available Xamarin tooling didn't support that way of working.

Re: Let's stop bashing C#

#96

Post by cryptarch »

WorldMaker wrote: post #87
slowmovintarget wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having used it in production for a more than a month now... No. No it's not. Mono and .Net Core RC1 were more stable for the same workloads.

Anecdotally, I've not seen any issues, but then I've also been hosting on IIS. Obviously, YMMV. ETA: Also, my comment above was meant to be from the perspective of that it is a technically finished product with an active support lifespan. I did not mean to imply that it was better (or worse) than any alternatives, but that under the accepted definition of "production ready" where a thing is finished and supported, it…

Maybe "finished and supported" is the definition of production ready in Microsoft-land, but I'd say "stable, well-tested and batteries-included" is a lot more important.

.NET Core has none of that going.

Re: Let's stop bashing C#

#98

Post by WorldMaker »

cryptarch wrote: post #96
WorldMaker wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anecdotally, I've not seen any issues, but then I've also been hosting on IIS. Obviously, YMMV. ETA: Also, my comment above was meant to be from the perspective of that it is a technically finished product with an active support lifespan. I did not mean to imply that it was better (or worse) than any alternatives, but that under the accepted definition of "production ready" where a thing is finished and supported, it…

Maybe "finished and supported" is the definition of production ready in Microsoft-land, but I'd say "stable, well-tested and batteries-included" is a lot more important. .NET Core has none of that going.

Again, this seems like an anecdotal divide more than anything. .NET Core has certainly seemed "stable, well-tested, and batteries-included" for any of the projects where I have used it.

Re: Let's stop bashing C#

#99

Post by GordonS »

cryptarch wrote: post #94
GordonS wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just recently they started releasing statically linked, distro-agnostic binaries.

And that's exactly what I don't want. I choose to trust Debian maintainers; I don't choose to trust Microsoft. If the package ends up in Debian stable, its pretty much guaranteed to be stable and to at least install and uninstall cleanly and consistently; it also won't have builtin telemetry because that's Not Done in the Debian distribution. With the beta stuff provided by Microsoft there's no reason for me to assum…

Well, as a developer who needs to ship a packaged version of the CoreCLR runtime, this is exactly what I do want!

But surely there's no reason why we can't have both?

Post reply on HN