31–40 of 124 posts
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?
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.
I thought we already have .NET 4. I don't understand.
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]".
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
.NET Framework 4.8 won't implement .NET Standard 2.1 doesn't mean .NET Framework won't implement new .NET Standard versions.
.NET Framework has been announced previously to be slower-movinh and lower-risk than Core, so it's not surprising that it will take longer for it to support new versions of .NET Standard. That the next Framework release won't incorporate the newest Standard doesn't mean Framework won't advance it's Standard support going forward.
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)
So they added Span as a big thing ... > (Span is) at the heart of most performance-related improvements in .NET Core 2.1. Since it allows managing buffers in a more efficient way, it can help in reducing allocations and copying. We consider Span to be a very fundamental type as it requires runtime and compiler support in order to be fully leveraged. Small struct that is declared as public readonly ref struct Span { p…
Does your template work with memory managed by a GC and provide all the memory safety guarantees that .NET does? If so, does it work seamlessly across the stack & the heap for both managed memory and unmanaged memory at the same time? I get it, similar concepts - but let's not dismiss the value in this addition.
It is used strictly in read-only places. It makes absolutely no sense to use things like std::string (and allocate it each time) when you need to pass string or fragment of string or array to consumers.
For write-only access I also have target that safely wraps all memcpy, memmove, strcpy[_s] cases.
I thought we already have .NET 4. I don't understand.
So they added Span as a big thing ... > (Span is) at the heart of most performance-related improvements in .NET Core 2.1. Since it allows managing buffers in a more efficient way, it can help in reducing allocations and copying. We consider Span to be a very fundamental type as it requires runtime and compiler support in order to be fully leveraged. Small struct that is declared as public readonly ref struct Span { p…
Does your template work with memory managed by a GC and provide all the memory safety guarantees that .NET does? If so, does it work seamlessly across the stack & the heap for both managed memory and unmanaged memory at the same time? I get it, similar concepts - but let's not dismiss the value in this addition.