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

.NET 8

devblogs.microsoft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 374 posts

Re: .NET 8

#131

Post by neonsunset »

poulpy123 wrote: post #105

I'm looking at a language to write simple executables with or without GUI and that are not too verbose or too complicated. A bit like a compiled python :) Would .NET 8 be a good challenger ? I previously didn't consider it because the compilation to binary was looking more like an experiment, and the example I've seen were quite verbose (in a java way).

It would. Compiling .NET binaries to a single executable that does not require installing a runtime has been a thing for quite some time actually, but NativeAOT definitely improves the "simple and lightweight" part of your inquiry:

JIT: dotnet publish -p:PublishSingleFile=true -p:PublishTrimmed=true

AOT: dotnet publish -p:PublishAot=true

Re: .NET 8

#132

Post by bob1029 »

RajT88 wrote: post #59
xeromal wrote: post #4

Tangentially related but I was impressed with .NET recently. I was recently tasked with tackling an extremely old and proprietary video format that embedded GPS, video, audio, and several other components. The files were huge and just a mess to understand and I eventually found an old player application that was also proprietary. I decompiled it into C# and stripped the player aspect out of it leaving the code the pe…

The .Net ecosystem has a lot of great tooling, for sure. The main issue I have had is if you are trying to get into the .Net Ecosystem without spending money. There are quite good free tools, but you have to figure out what works best for you if you're used to the non-free ones. I assume instead of Reflector for the decompilation, you used DotPeek?

> The main issue I have had is if you are trying to get into the .Net Ecosystem without spending money.

I suggest not trying to do this.

You can certainly make most of .NET8 work with a pure OSS toolchain, but your overall development experience is going to be destitute compared to that of the official tool chain. To be clear - I think paid alternatives, such as Rider are fantastic too, but even so I've had some trouble at the edges with paid 3rd party (Blazor apps, UWP, etc).

At the end of the day, you have to ask yourself about what your hourly rate is. If you are going to spend a 20 hour premium per week bandaging up a "free" .NET toolchain, whereas the official, $100/m stack costs you 1-2 hours, which one actually costs you more? What are your principles worth in terms of your free time?

Re: .NET 8

#133

Post by neonsunset »

gettodachoppa wrote: post #118
financltravsty wrote: post #8

Lots of very cool stuff here (AOT, Aspire, etc.). .NET has been held down by the image of its early days, but it has become a pure joy to work with recently. The improvements in tooling and ergonomics have made it a replacement for Go in our org (we migrated from .NET Core 3.1 to Go back to .NET 6 recently).

> .NET has been held down by the image of its early days, but it has become a pure joy to work with recently People have been saying that for the past 4 years. As someone who's never used .NET but develops embedded apps for Linux, I had high hopes for it become the best story for crossplatform development, it still feels like the crossplatform is held by ductape. It's still Xamarin for mobile, Avalonia (a 1-man proje…

When it comes to the OSS aspect itself, debugging experience is not the strongest suit but if you overlook it - both Linux and macOS are very well supported by either VS Code / or any other LSP compatible editor + Omnisharp (or DevKit nowadays I guess?) or Rider (which is commercial but is often even better than Visual Studio, definitely faster too).

Re: .NET 8

#134

Post by SamFold »

bob1029 wrote: post #132
RajT88 wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The .Net ecosystem has a lot of great tooling, for sure. The main issue I have had is if you are trying to get into the .Net Ecosystem without spending money. There are quite good free tools, but you have to figure out what works best for you if you're used to the non-free ones. I assume instead of Reflector for the decompilation, you used DotPeek?

> The main issue I have had is if you are trying to get into the .Net Ecosystem without spending money. I suggest not trying to do this. You can certainly make most of .NET8 work with a pure OSS toolchain, but your overall development experience is going to be destitute compared to that of the official tool chain. To be clear - I think paid alternatives, such as Rider are fantastic too, but even so I've had some trou…

What would you say is the current best in class toolchain for .NET (assuming I'm running on a ARM Mac)?

Re: .NET 8

#135

Post by starik36 »

RajT88 wrote: post #59
xeromal wrote: post #4

Tangentially related but I was impressed with .NET recently. I was recently tasked with tackling an extremely old and proprietary video format that embedded GPS, video, audio, and several other components. The files were huge and just a mess to understand and I eventually found an old player application that was also proprietary. I decompiled it into C# and stripped the player aspect out of it leaving the code the pe…

The .Net ecosystem has a lot of great tooling, for sure. The main issue I have had is if you are trying to get into the .Net Ecosystem without spending money. There are quite good free tools, but you have to figure out what works best for you if you're used to the non-free ones. I assume instead of Reflector for the decompilation, you used DotPeek?

I use JustDecompile. It's free, last I checked, and it works great.

Re: .NET 8

#136

Post by merb »

Kwpolska wrote: post #127
Thaxll wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Big difference is that Go is stable and conservative, net core keep adding a billion features every release. Looking at some net core 2/3 stuff and now to see how many things changed. Good luck with your code base in 5 years when someone decide to add all the new stuff.

.NET is stable, they very rarely remove things. Code written for .NET Framework 2.x will probably work fine on .NET 8 (unless it uses the things that didn't make the jump, like WCF, but there are libraries that provide SOAP support.) Can a single developer remember all of .NET? No, but that applies to most languages/ecosystems. But if you encounter something you've never seen, you can always check the docs. And the t…

Actually most wcf code does run on .net 7+ they open sourced it into corewcf. (At least a lot of the things) Webforms however is dead.

Re: .NET 8

#137

Post by croes »

meibo wrote: post #53
croes wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Still confusing if can't simply switch to the most recent version or have legacy software. .NET Framework 4.8 will be longer supported than .Net 5, 6, 7 and maybe 8.

This is not unusual in Microsoft-land. If a tech stack or version is very widely adopted or heavily revamped in a new version, they will often support that old version for a very long time - see Windows 7.

No problem with LTS but why the confusing name scheme.

Just like their Xboxes.

Re: .NET 8

#138

Post by HumblyTossed »

pdntspa wrote: post #11

I just wish its cross-platform UIs weren't such a mess. Particularly with its MVCish implementation, it was like it couldn't decide what it wanted to be. I really really wish there was a good, straightforward desktop GUI for .Net that simply worked crossplatform and wasn't a complete pain in the ass to program.

UI frameworks are a heavy lift, more-so to be cross-platform. Let's say someone tries, but it's not to your liking? I mean, there can't be 12 different frameworks, that's not sustainable.

Re: .NET 8

#139

Post by starik36 »

bob1029 wrote: post #132
RajT88 wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The .Net ecosystem has a lot of great tooling, for sure. The main issue I have had is if you are trying to get into the .Net Ecosystem without spending money. There are quite good free tools, but you have to figure out what works best for you if you're used to the non-free ones. I assume instead of Reflector for the decompilation, you used DotPeek?

> The main issue I have had is if you are trying to get into the .Net Ecosystem without spending money. I suggest not trying to do this. You can certainly make most of .NET8 work with a pure OSS toolchain, but your overall development experience is going to be destitute compared to that of the official tool chain. To be clear - I think paid alternatives, such as Rider are fantastic too, but even so I've had some trou…

What is the issue with using Visual Studio Community Edition? Or if not on Windows, using VS Code with the plugin. All free.
Post reply on HN