Understanding the .NET ecosystem: The evolution of .NET into .NET 7

Post by edandersen » Wed, Mar 22, 2023, 12:25 AM UTC

dragonwriter wrote: post #127

edandersen wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The different platform argument was easy to make when it was called ".NET Core". Almost impossible to make when it's also called ".NET", quite deliberately.

No, really, version numbers within a broader brand that can indicate incompatibility are not something non-technical users with any familiarity with modern consumer society are unfamiliar with. I get that techies sometimes have preferences for perfect and eternal backward compatibility within a named product line, but trying to pass this off with “how will you explain this to non-techies”, and then treating non-techi…

Post by bearzdev » Wed, Mar 22, 2023, 12:27 AM UTC

shrubble wrote: post #103

Doesn't run on Solaris and doesn't run on FreeBSD. An 'LTS' release means ... about 3 years. No thanks...

Post by matthewrobertso » Wed, Mar 22, 2023, 12:29 AM UTC

starik36 wrote: post #161

Jochim wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

.NET Standard specified a common API that was implemented by the .NET Core and .NET Framework runtimes, allowing library authors to easily target both platforms. .NET Standard solved a problem at the time but as elucidated in the article, it turned out not to be the right solution in the long term. .NET Framework is essentially in maintenance mode and won't be receiving new language features, so new .NET Standard ver…

So the bottom line is that .NET Core can't call a .NET Framework library. It must be converted to .NET Standard first. And despite deprecation (let's call it that), .NET 5, 6, 7, 8 will continue to support calling into .NET Standard libraries.

Post by osigurdson » Wed, Mar 22, 2023, 12:33 AM UTC

pyjarrett wrote: post #16

tiffanyh wrote: post #2

It’s a tired thing to say, but the “.NET” naming is so confusing on what’s what. Which is sad because there’s so much to like about .NET

1. .NET "Core" ... I tell myself "C is for Cross platform." This is usually what people seem like they mean now when they talk about ".NET". 2. .NET "Framework" ... I tell myself "F is for Former." This is the older, Windows specific version. 3. .NET "Standard" ... I tell myself "S is for Specification." This is just the spec which defines what Core and Framework must implement.

Post by osigurdson » Wed, Mar 22, 2023, 12:36 AM UTC

Kwpolska wrote: post #107

kgwxd wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's just .NET going forward (for now) if you don't need to worry about any old stuff.

The issue is with Googling (or Binging if you’re so inclined). If you google ".NET foobar", you might get answers for .NET Core, but you might also get old answers for the .NET Framework, written at a time when there was just one .NET, or when .NET Core was not as relevant and not the “real” .NET. Of course, it’s not super important if “foobar” is something simple and generic, like “.NET split string”, but when you g…