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

.NET Standard 2.0 is final

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 69 posts

Re: .NET Standard 2.0 is final

#21

Post by pjmlp »

randomf1fan wrote: post #19
jasallen wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Microsoft's Xamarin Forms 3.0 (stable release later this year) allows you to target Linux and Mac[1] and is very similar to UWP conceptually - UI written once, run anywhere. It's just that Xamarin's "anywhere" is much larger :) Disclosure: I work on Xamarin team at Microsoft [1] https://forums.xamarin.com/discussion/85747/xamarin-forms-fe...

Question for you - I have created a few (okay, two) UWP apps, but the limited success of the store has made me look to using Xamarin. Only thing is, Xamarin's XAML is sufficiently different from UWP's XAML that I got disoriented and gave up. If I want to target cross platform apps (including Linux and Mac), should I wait for Xamarin Forms 3 or will UWP eventually expand to cover Mac & Linux? I'm only a hobby programm…

Microsoft is working out a XAML standard to cover that case.

If you check BUILD 2017 sessions, there were a couple of talks about it.

Re: .NET Standard 2.0 is final

#22

Post by oceanswave »

ko27 wrote: post #11
maxxxxx wrote: post #9

I don't really get what the purpose of this spec is. I would much prefer if they spent the time on improving the .NET Core story. In typical MS manner .NET seems to get more confusing all the time.

> improving the .NET Core story They are. NET Core fully implements NET Standard.

From an interface perspective. From a behavioral perspective not so much. A lot of classes will throw not implemented or have slightly different results

Re: .NET Standard 2.0 is final

#23

Post by jasallen »

randomf1fan wrote: post #19
jasallen wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Microsoft's Xamarin Forms 3.0 (stable release later this year) allows you to target Linux and Mac[1] and is very similar to UWP conceptually - UI written once, run anywhere. It's just that Xamarin's "anywhere" is much larger :) Disclosure: I work on Xamarin team at Microsoft [1] https://forums.xamarin.com/discussion/85747/xamarin-forms-fe...

Question for you - I have created a few (okay, two) UWP apps, but the limited success of the store has made me look to using Xamarin. Only thing is, Xamarin's XAML is sufficiently different from UWP's XAML that I got disoriented and gave up. If I want to target cross platform apps (including Linux and Mac), should I wait for Xamarin Forms 3 or will UWP eventually expand to cover Mac & Linux? I'm only a hobby programm…

IF UWP will expand to do that it's not in any announced roadmap (and if it's being discussed internally I'm not privy to such things :) ) whereas Xamarin is doing it now(ish). You are right, the XAML is a bit different, the syntax is the same, but we use different class structures.

Re: .NET Standard 2.0 is final

#24

Post by randomf1fan »

jasallen wrote: post #23
randomf1fan wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Question for you - I have created a few (okay, two) UWP apps, but the limited success of the store has made me look to using Xamarin. Only thing is, Xamarin's XAML is sufficiently different from UWP's XAML that I got disoriented and gave up. If I want to target cross platform apps (including Linux and Mac), should I wait for Xamarin Forms 3 or will UWP eventually expand to cover Mac & Linux? I'm only a hobby programm…

IF UWP will expand to do that it's not in any announced roadmap (and if it's being discussed internally I'm not privy to such things :) ) whereas Xamarin is doing it now(ish). You are right, the XAML is a bit different, the syntax is the same, but we use different class structures.

Thank you, I didn't know this wasn't actually announced.

Re: .NET Standard 2.0 is final

#25

Post by randomf1fan »

pjmlp wrote: post #21
randomf1fan wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Question for you - I have created a few (okay, two) UWP apps, but the limited success of the store has made me look to using Xamarin. Only thing is, Xamarin's XAML is sufficiently different from UWP's XAML that I got disoriented and gave up. If I want to target cross platform apps (including Linux and Mac), should I wait for Xamarin Forms 3 or will UWP eventually expand to cover Mac & Linux? I'm only a hobby programm…

Microsoft is working out a XAML standard to cover that case. If you check BUILD 2017 sessions, there were a couple of talks about it.

Yeah, I did watch those, but haven't kept up with the latest news - not sure if they have announced any progress.

Re: .NET Standard 2.0 is final

#26

Post by jasallen »

oceanswave wrote: post #22
ko27 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> improving the .NET Core story They are. NET Core fully implements NET Standard.

From an interface perspective. From a behavioral perspective not so much. A lot of classes will throw not implemented or have slightly different results

That's true, but it's done so that you can have simple 'if' logic to determine if something is available without having to recompile. If the interfaces were missing altogether the libraries wouldn't be portable from one implementation to another.

Re: .NET Standard 2.0 is final

#27

Post by terrajobst »

curiousDog wrote: post #2

Such a confusing name. I thought this was the .NET Spec publication. Still better than .NET 365 Premium Plus I guess :-)

Indeed :-)

Here is how to think about this:

* .NET Standard is a specification of APIs.

* ECMA 335 is the specification of the .NET runtime aspects (i.e. what the metadata format is, what the semantics are of the intermediate language and so on).

* ECMA 334 is the C# language specification.

So there are really multiple specs that would make up a ".NET spec". We simply settled on .NET Standard because it's shorter than .NET Standard Library and the word standard conveys the spec aspect around it. We could have called it .NET Standard API Set but hey, it's supposed to be a product name, not a multi-word description :-)

Does this help?

Re: .NET Standard 2.0 is final

#28

Post by LyalinDotCom »

Awesome milestone, so happy to see progress with .NET Standard as it makes developers lives a lot more predictable.

On that note... a shameless plug :), don't miss .NET Conf 2017 our 3-day digital event that will talk all about .NET standard 2.0 and much more in Sept.

Sept 19th - 21st, watch anywhere details at: http://www.dotnetconf.net/

Re: .NET Standard 2.0 is final

#29

Post by terrajobst »

smitherfield wrote: post #14

So just so I'm clear, .NET ECMA Spec ⊆ .NET Standard ⊆ (.NET Core ∩ Mono ∩ Xamarin ∩ Unity) ⊆ .NET Core ⊆ .NET Framework Correct?

Not quite. See this comment for the relationships of the specs: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14971769

.NET Framework, .NET Core, Mono, Xamarin, and Unity are all implementing all the .NET specs. They are share many aspects, but each also bring specific capabilities that the others don't have, so its not very useful to think of these having a superset/subset relationship.

Re: .NET Standard 2.0 is final

#30

Post by janpieterz »

oceanswave wrote: post #22
ko27 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> improving the .NET Core story They are. NET Core fully implements NET Standard.

From an interface perspective. From a behavioral perspective not so much. A lot of classes will throw not implemented or have slightly different results

Wait... first I've heard of this. Not that I'm reading every single post letter for letter but have been following the .NET Standard move quite a bit.

Is there a list somewhere that specifies what is not implemented per target, though it's in the standard?

Post reply on HN