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

Official support for .NET

stripe.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 64 posts

Re: Official support for .NET

#41

Post by perfectstorm »

recentdarkness wrote: post #40
bradford wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> .NET had/has a higher cost to entry > It is arguably also a bad business decision to shell out $$ for a language that isn't used at your company. What cost(s) are you thinking of here? .NET doesn't cost anything (monetarily). Some of the tools cost money but you can also get by in the .NET world with a command-prompt and text editor (I did as a hobbyist for quite some time). I might be misunderstanding your stateme…

One needs to invest $$ because you pay money for the developers time to create software

> but .NET had/has a higher cost to entry (higher than say, ruby/py/java)

as opposed to Java developers who are hmm...free ?

Re: Official support for .NET

#42

Post by alkonaut »

c0nfused wrote: post #7
tracker1 wrote: post #4

Aside: there seems to be a lot of renewed interest in .Net with the advances of Core and other cross platform support in the open.

It always seems odd to me that people are excited about .net coming to Linux or osx. Mono has been around for so long I can't remember when it showed up, 2001? As far as I know mono's been feature complete for a decade or more. .net core is neat, but for me it's a tooling thing and not a "we can write .net of Linux" thing

I got excited about running mono about 5 minutes every year for the last decade. Each time the enthusiasm came to a complete halt when I actually tried it. Core is in a much better position in terms of completeness, reliability, user friendlyness and not least usage. You always felt like you were the only person trying C# on Linux years ago. Not so now.

Re: Official support for .NET

#43

Post by ploxiln »

lwansbrough wrote: post #24

More Silicon Valley startups need to get on board with .NET. Yeah, I know it's strongly typed and doesn't abuse white space, but you're missing A LOT of potential customers when you skip out on .NET. Seems like a really poor business decision to ignore it simply because there isn't someone on your team who has built a compiler for it in their spare time.

Eh, this seems like an example where Stripe did pretty well for itself by leaving this part of the market for last.

Re: Official support for .NET

#44

Post by oblio »

bradford wrote: post #37
dbnoch wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just wanted to chime in on this. IMO It will happen more often now, but .NET had/has a higher cost to entry (higher than say, ruby/py/java) which is the real reason why SV startups haven't been on board. It is arguably also a bad business decision to shell out $$ for a language that isn't used at your company.

> .NET had/has a higher cost to entry > It is arguably also a bad business decision to shell out $$ for a language that isn't used at your company. What cost(s) are you thinking of here? .NET doesn't cost anything (monetarily). Some of the tools cost money but you can also get by in the .NET world with a command-prompt and text editor (I did as a hobbyist for quite some time). I might be misunderstanding your stateme…

For a long time many third party components were commercial. A lot more than in the Ruby, Python or Java ecosystems, for example.

Things are slowly moving towards Open Source and cross platform, but .NET is far behind Java at this moment. It is moving fast, though.

Re: Official support for .NET

#45

Post by dewiz »

scarface74 wrote: post #32
martinald wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, I've been using mono in semi-production for the best part of a decade for ASP.NET and it's been a complete nightmare every time. It's also a shame that VS for Mac is so half baked for web projects despite MSFTs backing. This issue I have been search for an answer for a while is so obvious I don't understand how they didn't catch it: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/43967326/visual-studio-m...

Luckily there is a better alternative.... https://www.jetbrains.com/rider/

I love Rider but since they went GA it's super expensive. VS for Mac beta channel is decent, then there's VSCode which is free

Re: Official support for .NET

#46

Post by lwansbrough »

frik wrote: post #36
lwansbrough wrote: post #24

More Silicon Valley startups need to get on board with .NET. Yeah, I know it's strongly typed and doesn't abuse white space, but you're missing A LOT of potential customers when you skip out on .NET. Seems like a really poor business decision to ignore it simply because there isn't someone on your team who has built a compiler for it in their spare time.

PG wrote some essays about it: startups better spend their seed/series money on other things than software licenses. Then the unthinkable happened: after PG left, HN got MSFT PR-heavy in spring 2015. People should learn from the history.

> startups better spend their seed/series money on other things than software licenses

Like say, paying developers to maintain their SDK in Closure?

Re: Official support for .NET

#47

Post by lwansbrough »

ComputerGuru wrote: post #30
lwansbrough wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Still in my hall of shame: CockroachDB, which decided Closure and Rust were more important than .NET - I love Cockroach but based on this I wonder if they want to make any money.

Isn't cockroach protocol compatible with PGSQL?

Yes but they don't officially support any PostgreSQL libraries in .NET (like say, npgsql.)

Plenty of other languages are tested officially by the CockroachDB team, but somehow they missed .NET.

Re: Official support for .NET

#48

Post by gwenzek »

Kipters wrote: post #17
mattchamb wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

not sure i would go this route, but you can actually call java libraries from .net using a project called IKVM. I used it for a toy project and it seemed to work

IKVM development has been halted: http://weblog.ikvm.net/

So sad to learn about that. Ikvm was so great! It was really granting you access to all the Java world in .Net I hope it will find a new developer. Microsoft should pay someone to do it IMHO

Re: Official support for .NET

#49

Post by romanovcode »

thanksgiving wrote: post #39

A little off-topic but I'm gettinga little impatient. What is the reason we can't have a dnf install dotnet or apt install dotnet and have it linked to whatever is the most recent? I can even do that with php-cli. A deeper problem to me is I don't think there's enough expertise outside of Microsoft to continue this project should Microsoft decide to take its toys and go home.

>Microsoft decide to take its toys and go home.

coreclr and corefx (basically C# .NET Core) source code is using MIT license.

Post reply on HN