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

.NET 5.0

devblogs.microsoft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 466 posts

Re: .NET 5.0

#41

Post by louthy »

dustinmoris wrote: post #4

> It’s already in active use by teams at Microsoft and other companies... This means nothing anymore. MSFT says that about everything they release and users are still often left with the feeling that they are guinea pigs testing a very unfinished product. > For Visual Studio users, you need Visual Studio 16.8 or later to use .NET 5.0 on Windows and the latest version of Visual Studio for Mac) on macOS. The C# extensi…

I use Rider now, VS got to the point of being so slow that frequently I'd have to wait 0.5 seconds for each character I was typing to appear. The performance is utterly, utterly terrible. Yet, all I see from the VS team on Twitter is "look at this new useless feature we've added", when all I needed was for the code I'm typing to appear.

God help you if you ever wanted to rename a symbol, it was Schrodinger's rename, it would either complete immediately, or never complete, lock up VS, and I'd have to restart. So I had to stop using it, and eventually I stopped using VS altogether.

Rider has its own quirks and annoyances, but it's quick, and lets me type even when it's doing stuff.

There seems to be something very wrong with the architecture of VS.

Re: .NET 5.0

#42

Post by qz2 »

cpitman wrote: post #35
qz2 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The language is absolutely brilliant and I love it. It's the vendor's schizophrenia that's the problem. I've run out of fingers to count things that have been deprecated painfully on after being promoted as the next greatest thing and sold hard. This has cost me, my clients and my employers ridiculous amounts of money to unfuck.

Totally fair, anyone in the Microsoft development ecosystem has to learn to be incredibly skeptical of anything new. Anytime I spent on adopting Silverlight was essentially wasted. I had one client that had adopted a random WYSIWYG released by Microsoft to design WCF services, when anyone experienced in the ecosystem knew it had abandonware written all over it. Of course, other ecosystems have their own versions of t…

Exactly. Yes I interviewed at a company where Silverlight and WCF was the future and they'd just rewritten everything in it. I didn't see it with the way everything was going. I dread to think of what happened to their business when the rug was pulled out overnight.

"Microsoft says you need to start funding your entire product to be rewritten from scratch"

Re: .NET 5.0

#44

Post by kroltan »

elamje wrote: post #18

As someone who uses .NET daily, but loves Clojure and other functional programming paradigms - Records seem like a very compelling feature. Immutable data structures without any hassle to set up. Simply write “record” where you would normally write “class” and boom, you are working with immutable objects. This is one step closer to one the best features of Clojure IMO -everything is immutable. Additionally, there see…

You probably know, but F# exists if you want a functional language in the .NET ecosystem.

Granted, you end up dealing with a bunch of OOP libraries still since .NET is very C#-centered, but the language is pretty good and the integration is painless.

Re: .NET 5.0

#45

Post by wincy »

brainzap wrote: post #33
mattmanser wrote: post #23

So, on the plus side with the new .net, I recently made a .net core web app on Linux, and generally it's been pretty easy. I'm also impressed at just how fast asp.net core is compared to asp.net, the time it takes to open your site in debug mode has dropped dramatically, from what used to be 1/2 minute in asp.net to a few seconds in .net core. On the bad side? Mainly the asp.net core team and their push for Dependenc…

alternatives?

Express with Typescript feels pretty good in my opinion.

Re: .NET 5.0

#46

Post by mattmanser »

tester756 wrote: post #34
mattmanser wrote: post #23

So, on the plus side with the new .net, I recently made a .net core web app on Linux, and generally it's been pretty easy. I'm also impressed at just how fast asp.net core is compared to asp.net, the time it takes to open your site in debug mode has dropped dramatically, from what used to be 1/2 minute in asp.net to a few seconds in .net core. On the bad side? Mainly the asp.net core team and their push for Dependenc…

>and you're in for an even bigger nightmare if you want to separate business logic and web code into two projects (which is a pretty common design). I've given up with the config DI and just assign them all to static variables. So you have static variable in web project and then add reference to web project to obtain that config? Do I get that right? I never felt like config DI was a problem once you did all the stuf…

To me it's just so pointless, here's an example:

    using Microsoft.Extensions.Configuration;  //extra line
    using Microsoft.Extensions.Options;    //extra line

    public class AdminController : Controller
    {
        IOptions settings; //extra line

        public AdminController(IOptions settings) //extra code
        {
            this.settings = settings; //extra line
        }
        

        public void RandomMethod()
        {
            var a  = settings.Value.FinallyMySetting; // 5 extra lines to access your config, genius...
        }
    }
A complete and utter waste of my time to put all those lines in, it's just pointless boilerplate trash, which C# has been getting rid of excellently, all to be undone by whoever wrote Microsoft.Extensions.Configuration. And you have to do it any where you want to get a config value.

On top of that, if you want to use it in a console app, you have to add like 5 packages. Yes, FIVE.
Then add this delightful mess just to initialize it:

    var environmentName = Environment.GetEnvironmentVariable("ENVIRONMENT");

    var builder = new ConfigurationBuilder()
                .AddJsonFile($"appsettings.json", true, true)
                .AddJsonFile($"appsettings.{environmentName}.json", true, true)
                .AddEnvironmentVariables();
 
    var configuration = builder.Build();
When you compare that to what any other framework does, it just beggars belief that they though this was a good way of handling config.

When I was setting this all up, I obviously hit up SO, and it's clear from many of the (incorrect) answers on SO that people just don't get it. It's too complicated for something that should be super simple.

I get that it's handy to be able to configure all that yourself, but all of that should be default and a single line/package.

Re: .NET 5.0

#47

Post by 0xcoffee »

mattmanser wrote: post #23

So, on the plus side with the new .net, I recently made a .net core web app on Linux, and generally it's been pretty easy. I'm also impressed at just how fast asp.net core is compared to asp.net, the time it takes to open your site in debug mode has dropped dramatically, from what used to be 1/2 minute in asp.net to a few seconds in .net core. On the bad side? Mainly the asp.net core team and their push for Dependenc…

I agree. The first thing I always do is make a custom Settings class which just loads settings via good old `Environment.GetEnvironmentVariable`. Super simple and never failed me.

Bonus Points, by loading all settings at once into strongly typed properties at startup, it will fail fast if a setting is missing, which to me is a benefit.

But I still pass this class via DI to the controllers for testability reasons. If you are using ASP Net, just do things the asp-net way for the sake of other people who have to inherit the code.

Outside of AspNet I never use any automatic DI.

Re: .NET 5.0

#48

Post by balabaster »

mattmanser wrote: post #23

So, on the plus side with the new .net, I recently made a .net core web app on Linux, and generally it's been pretty easy. I'm also impressed at just how fast asp.net core is compared to asp.net, the time it takes to open your site in debug mode has dropped dramatically, from what used to be 1/2 minute in asp.net to a few seconds in .net core. On the bad side? Mainly the asp.net core team and their push for Dependenc…

You'd want your config injected so that you can swap out configs for test harnesses for continuous integration and deployment. It's one of the mainstays of making your software deployable by automation.

Re: .NET 5.0

#49

Post by Scarbutt »

mattmanser wrote: post #23

So, on the plus side with the new .net, I recently made a .net core web app on Linux, and generally it's been pretty easy. I'm also impressed at just how fast asp.net core is compared to asp.net, the time it takes to open your site in debug mode has dropped dramatically, from what used to be 1/2 minute in asp.net to a few seconds in .net core. On the bad side? Mainly the asp.net core team and their push for Dependenc…

Having been using express again recently, I'm seriously thinking of ditching the asp.net core stack despite my general preference for statically typed languages.

Why not typescript?

Re: .NET 5.0

#50

Post by mmis1000 »

lwansbrough wrote: post #31
mattmanser wrote: post #23

So, on the plus side with the new .net, I recently made a .net core web app on Linux, and generally it's been pretty easy. I'm also impressed at just how fast asp.net core is compared to asp.net, the time it takes to open your site in debug mode has dropped dramatically, from what used to be 1/2 minute in asp.net to a few seconds in .net core. On the bad side? Mainly the asp.net core team and their push for Dependenc…

Authentication is in the request pipeline, so it makes sense that it's async if you're talking to some sort of storage engine. We're using the async APIs to pull user/client app information from our database. Why would we want that to be synchronous?

For simplicity? Just like how js get async await thing eventually.
Post reply on HN