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

The Case for C# and .NET

chrlschn.medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 376 posts

Re: The Case for C# and .NET

#101

Post by ivraatiems »

chaostheory wrote: post #58

Reading this post, it seems like the author never tried Typescript which seems to be heavily influenced by C#. I hate JavaScript as a language, but Typescript is very palatable. Like it or not JavaScript and Typescript are the franca lingua of programming for now

The problem with TypeScript is that because it's compiled to JavaScript eventually, it's broken whether it wants to be or not. TS might make sense on its own, but the medium is the message. You can't escape the bizarre stuff JS does when it's right there, under the hood, waiting for you...

Re: The Case for C# and .NET

#102

Post by chocolatemario »

mccorrinall wrote: post #57
sandreas wrote: post #18

I also think that C# and .NET are awesome. Especially latest releases dotnet 6 and upcoming 7 have a ton of new things to be even more productive. I like the fact, that you can develop command line apps, Web APIs, Desktop Apps and smartphone apps all with the same toolset, including the fact that deployment is possible on nearly every major platform for every major platform (except iOS and macOS Apps, as always only…

I tried writing a simple crud api with asp.net, which should parse and respond json. It was the worst development experience I ever had while writing json apis. Validation? Not existent. OpenAPI/swagger documentation generation? Not existent. Then it also tried to force me into using MVC, while acting that it is express with its middlewares. I switched back to node.js with fastify and wrote my app in an hour. I reall…

As a C# developer I could say the same about my experience dealing with my first foray into [insert random language] and my attempt to develop [something with a non-trivial framework].

The issues you had could be attacked by navigating through this section of documentation, diving into the tutorial referenced in the beginning of the Overview section and the subsequent sections: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/aspnet/core/web-api/?view=a.... This is not necessarily in defense of c# and dotnet, but this reads like you barely spent any time trying to digest the documentation.

Re: The Case for C# and .NET

#103

Post by fabian2k »

noisy_boy wrote: post #31

My understanding is that with .NET Core, the experience of developing and running on Linux is on-par with Windows(?). However, my impression is that once it comes to building web services, ASP.NET has more "windows-specific" assumptions/moving parts - can someone knowledgeable on this correct me if I'm wrong?

The only parts that are noticeably Windows-centric are some of the tools around .NET. The older tools are Windows-only, you can't get Visual Studio on Linux.

For ASP.NET there is nothing Windows-specific in there I've noticed.

Re: The Case for C# and .NET

#104

Post by dustinmoris »

DeWilde wrote: post #92
dustinmoris wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The dev experience is Windows only, STILL: https://news.ycombinator.com/reply?id=32220935&goto=item%3Fi... (Also the benchmarks are a cheat, look at the source code of C# vs the source code of Go or Java)

I use Rider on my Ubuntu machine and the dev experience for me, is even better than using VS2022 on Windows.

No post body was provided.

Re: The Case for C# and .NET

#108

Post by moonchrome »

labrador wrote: post #5

> For the front-end, JavaScript is unavoidable (for now) Author really needs to give Blazor a try. I wrote some comments last week speculating that I'd use Dart or TypeScript with C# .NET on the client because WebAssembly doesn't do DOM manipulation, but turns out I should have waited to learn it better before making a comment. I've learned I can add events and event handlers to elements without ever leaving C#. Then…

Have you actually tried Blazor ? Just the schism between WASM and Server and the feature matrix there, and generally shit quality of early stage Microsoft product - I wouldn't touch it with a 10 foot pole, likewise for MAUI - I've seen coworkers prototype both for some greenfield projects in last month or two and both projects gave up on it because it just isn't there yet for mainstream development.

I mean .NET core was pretty much in this boat pre v3, it took them years to move past the .NET standard mess, Xamarin never cleaned up and they are hoping MAUI will eventually just sweep it under the rug.

I wouldn't bet on any Microsoft stack that hasn't had 3+ years of successful use in the wild - I've been burned too many times. You might say the same is true for any other project/stack - but even when they moved to OSS .NET projects have this Microsoft level of complexity and boilerplate that makes diagnosing trivial things a slog. And Microsoft likes to put "stable" label on a lot of things these days with the pressure to ship. Good rule of thumb - not worth my time until v3.

Re: The Case for C# and .NET

#109

Post by bmitc »

sandreas wrote: post #18

I also think that C# and .NET are awesome. Especially latest releases dotnet 6 and upcoming 7 have a ton of new things to be even more productive. I like the fact, that you can develop command line apps, Web APIs, Desktop Apps and smartphone apps all with the same toolset, including the fact that deployment is possible on nearly every major platform for every major platform (except iOS and macOS Apps, as always only…

> The sheer amount of concepts in C# is overwhelming

Agreed. But F# is one of the best designed languages around.

Post reply on HN