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

.NET Standard 2.1

blogs.msdn.microsoft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 124 posts

Re: .NET Standard 2.1

#11

Post by polskibus »

It's a pity 2.1 will not be implemented by netfx 4.8. I wonder if there will ever be E netfx with netstandard 2.1.

Sadly things are not looking good for standardization - on one hand we have new netstandard without netfx and on the other aspnet.core without netstandard (https://github.com/aspnet/AspNetCore/issues/3753).

Re: .NET Standard 2.1

#12

Post by sebazzz »

stevecalifornia wrote: post #10

Suggested naming standard: - .Net API Specification - (now known as .Net Standard) - .Net Windows - (now known as .Net Framework) - .Net Cross Platform - (now known as .Net Core)

I don't think Microsoft is going to rename .NET Framework, that would already break too much for too little benefit. .NET Core would simply not be renamed because it is too well known.

Regarding ".NET Standard", I agree, it is an API specification but to prevent confusion you should think (for now) of it as "The .NET Standard [API set]".

Re: .NET Standard 2.1

#14

Post by sebazzz »

RussianCow wrote: post #8
Someone1234 wrote: post #7

Let me just check if I finally understand this: - .Net Framework: The Windows Specific (and nearly deprecated) branch - .Net Core: The replacement for Framework and cross platform branch (but with Windows specific libraries) - .Net Standard: A way to write something that runs on both .Net Framework and Core?

To clarify: My understanding is that .NET Standard is a specification for a set of .NET APIs that all implementations support, rather than a concrete library or something like that. So if you target .NET Standard with your application, it should be able to run on any .NET implementation. Otherwise, yes, that sounds correct.

It is just an API set you target. You should see it as NodeJS vs Web Browser. They both support a common API set defined in ECMAScript 6 (for instance) which contains Date, Intl.DateFormat, Symbol.iterator, etc.

Note that executables cannot be compiled to .NET Standard, because they are self-bootstrapping so they must target one or the other (or both).

Re: .NET Standard 2.1

#16

Post by kodablah »

nikofeyn wrote: post #9
kodablah wrote: post #4

> Given many of the API additions in .NET Standard 2.1 require runtime changes in order to be meaningful, .NET Framework 4.8 will remain on .NET Standard 2.0 rather than implement .NET Standard 2.1. .NET Core 3.0 as well as upcoming versions of Xamarin, Mono, and Unity will be updated to implement .NET Standard 2.1. At some point, is it reasonable to expect Xamarin, Mono, Unity, and .NET Core to all really be backed…

.net standard and .net core and two separate things. the former is an api/library specification and the latter is an implementation of that specification. mono and .net framework are also implementations. https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/standard/net-standar... https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/mt842506.aspx

I understand that, but I am asking if the implementation ends up becoming the only implementation of a specification, is there a meaningful difference between the two? I would expect Mono to use more of .NET Core (or if not, curious why not hence my last question), and .NET framework is no longer an implementation of current and future .NET standard specifications (hence the part I quoted).

Re: .NET Standard 2.1

#17

Post by merb »

polskibus wrote: post #11

It's a pity 2.1 will not be implemented by netfx 4.8. I wonder if there will ever be E netfx with netstandard 2.1. Sadly things are not looking good for standardization - on one hand we have new netstandard without netfx and on the other aspnet.core without netstandard ( https://github.com/aspnet/AspNetCore/issues/3753 ).

I think it's more a pity that .net core 3.x still can't run ALL the things.

i.e. if .net core would run anything that could've run on .net framework/mono whatever by just retargeting to .net core 3.x and even dlls from .net 4.7 could be run on core 3.x than nobody would complain and people would love it since, it would reduce the pain of that many runtimes.

Re: .NET Standard 2.1

#18

Post by maxxxxx »

I do mainly desktop dev but reading that Core is now the platform with rapid improvements I wonder if it's possible to write WPF or UWP apps with .NET Core or Standard.

Does anyone know?

Re: .NET Standard 2.1

#19

Post by gulbanana »

Someone1234 wrote: post #7

Let me just check if I finally understand this: - .Net Framework: The Windows Specific (and nearly deprecated) branch - .Net Core: The replacement for Framework and cross platform branch (but with Windows specific libraries) - .Net Standard: A way to write something that runs on both .Net Framework and Core?

that was the primary purpose before, but since .NET Framework will no longer be implementing new .NET Standard versions, it's now more like a way to write something that runs on both .NET Core and on Xamarin platforms

Re: .NET Standard 2.1

#20

Post by michaelwda »

maxxxxx wrote: post #18

I do mainly desktop dev but reading that Core is now the platform with rapid improvements I wonder if it's possible to write WPF or UWP apps with .NET Core or Standard. Does anyone know?

This is coming in .NET Core 3. Slated for Q1 2019 AFAIK. https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/dotnet/2018/05/07/net-core-...
Post reply on HN