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

Despite best efforts .NET is still not an open platform

isdotnetopen.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

471–480 of 500 posts

Re: Despite best efforts .NET is still not an open platform

#471

Post by jsmeaton »

WorldMaker wrote: post #438
jsmeaton wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The existing one was an open source Microsoft project. Then they built a new closed-source version as a replacement. To be fair, pylance is orders of magnitude better with regards to performance. But I just don’t get what the reasoning was to make pylance closed source. It’s baffling.

My understanding is that pylance bundles in several ML models that back a lot of its performance increases over pyright and it is the ML models and closed-source data science that caused the LSP closure. I think data science also is best when it itself is open/open-source, and peer reviewed. I can understand why Microsoft wants to make that a moat to protect expensive data science and ML research boundaries and it do…

Thanks for this, it was definitely news to me. If this is the case then it makes slightly more sense, but is still disappointing.

Re: Despite best efforts .NET is still not an open platform

#472

Post by anthk »

Ygg2 wrote: post #293
natrys wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In a market share sense, Linux doesn't and never existed in the desktop in first place. However it's ubiquitous in servers and that success has nothing to do with a DE. Its universal success in server space also means many more people are acquainted with Linux today than Lisp in its heyday. If you consider the current 2% market share in desktop to be "existing", I will posit that these people aren't going away just b…

I'm not referencing the market share. I'm referring to Lisp Curse. http://www.winestockwebdesign.com/Essays/Lisp_Curse.html In summary: Because Lisp was easy to fork, any time two nerds disagreed it was forked. And because they weren't working on same database you got Lisps with patchworks of functionality/bugs that each on their own couldn't compare to more or less monolith language like C/C++ or Java. Same dynamic…

Scheme and Common Lisp are different environments altogether, Also, Emacs Lisp has a good chunk on fuctions backed it.

>s that each on their own couldn't compare to more or less monolith language like C/C++ or Java.

Good joke. On C++, Boost. Try to compile older C++ code from 2006 today, it may fail spectacularly.

A lot of older C++ games from 2006 will be damn difficult to compile today.

On Java, heh. Different and incompatible JRE's. Software tied to a single JRE where it crashes on the newer ones.

Should I go on?

Meanwhile, 20 yo Elisp code still runs today as-is.

Re: Despite best efforts .NET is still not an open platform

#473

Post by blagie »

pc86 wrote: post #351
blagie wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a point of experience, I know of only a handful of corporations from my childhood which preserved the same culture. The vast majority are entirely different. Most software engineering and executives jobs have a tenure of three years, and I think culture is definitely preserved for longer than that. However, it's very rarely preserved over decades. You're citing a classic joke. The experiment doesn't replicate when…

As a child you were familiar with the internal company culture of multiple corporations?

Oddly enough, yes. Don't judge; nerds come in all types.

I can't say I was intimately familiar, but at the level of reading books and trade press as good enough for the statements I'm making.

You don't need a lot of depth of knowledge to know when a culture completely changed. If you go outside and see a Toyota Camry and another Toyota Camry a week later, you can't tell whether the car is the same one. On the other hand, if one day, it's a Porsche, and the next week, and 18-wheeler, you can be pretty sure something changed....

Re: Despite best efforts .NET is still not an open platform

#475

Post by pjmlp »

tinco wrote: post #355
bob1029 wrote: post #250

.NET is the most open, non-trivial ecosystem I have ever participated in. I experienced 2 different problems with .NET (back in 2.x/3.x days), and was able to have interaction with the actual MS developers on their Github issue page without any sort of bullshit overhead process. Within days, I saw traction on my comments and within months I saw PRs that ultimately resolved the issue I presented. The following year, I…

You are unaware of how much better it is with the other ecosystems. Probably all of them except the ones controlled by Apple, Oracle and IBM. You want to know what's better than having actual MS developers interact with your issue on GH? Being able to submit a MR yourself and actually have that MR be merged in within days of it being good to go. That's not just a dream, that's the standard way of operating for most l…

You mean the ones where the JIT and AOT compilers, GC algorithms, GUI frameworks, and the IDE toolings are poor examples of the ones controlled by Google (forgot this one), Apple, Oracle and IBM?

Re: Despite best efforts .NET is still not an open platform

#476

Post by ngc248 »

loeg wrote: post #459
tomnipotent wrote: post #450

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Point out a major language that doesn't have a graveyard of PR's with similar stories.

The important distinction is that the PR graveyard of other projects isn't determined by MSFT's corporate priorities.

Any non-trivial OSS project has corporate sponsors on the steering committee and feature set/fixes are mostly driven by these corporate sponsors. So in the end it's all same.

Re: Despite best efforts .NET is still not an open platform

#478

Post by codebolt »

GABeech wrote: post #460
codebolt wrote: post #452

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a stretch to say that nobody pays for C#. A commercial Visual Studio license sure isn't free, and depending on what you're making you're at a big disadvantage without one.

Right, you're not paying for C# you're paying for an IDE. You don't need VS to use C#. Especially now with Roslyn a the c# language server a lot of other IDEs can do a lot of the same things VS can do.

And if you're working on open source/non-commercially, the free community edition is also a good option.

Re: Despite best efforts .NET is still not an open platform

#479

Post by actionfromafar »

makeitdouble wrote: post #420
actionfromafar wrote: post #376

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see. Then it's OK to skirt environmental and worker protection laws, I guess. As long as the products are nice.

Environment is tough. I see IKEA to blame here, but as long as there will be customer for cheaper goods who don’t care much about where the wood comes from, or how all of that is fabricated, it won’t change much. Other smaller makers have the same conundrum when they source their wood from bigger entities who will either hide where it actually comes from, and/or give plausible deniability. That’s where I see having e…

We provide a regulatory ecosystem - inside that ecosystem, Amazons and IKEAs are the winners.

If we change the ecosystem, other companies would evolve to be the winners. (Or IKEA and Amazon would change.)

Post reply on HN