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

Microsoft takes .NET open source and cross-platform

news.microsoft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 937 posts

Re: Microsoft takes .NET open source and cross-platform

#411

Post by edgyswingset »

eloisant wrote: post #317
jkrems wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, that's why you would use F# in .NET if you want something like Scala. And then I heard many people say that .NET wins again.

F# is not really like Scala in the sense that it's more "extreme" in terms of FP, you can't easy fallback on more classical patterns if FP doesn't work well for your problem.

Yes you can. I haven't found a traditional Object-Oriented pattern I can't use in F# ... but honestly, I've usually just ended up molding things to fit pattern-matching and reduced the complexity of things in the process.

Re: Microsoft takes .NET open source and cross-platform

#412

Post by alkonaut »

shmerl wrote: post #367
JeremyMorgan wrote: post #224

I feel like the last couple years I've been cheerleading for MS and telling people how much they've changed, how open things are becoming, and how awesome the development experience is. It's fallen on deaf ears or met with resistance, but today's announcements are really gonna drive the point home. Developers need to start looking more seriously at C#/.Net. The Scotts (Hanselman/Guthrie), Miguel De Icaza and so many…

> Developers need to start looking more seriously at C#/.Net. I don't think they need to. They might if they have some particular need in it, but there are way more interesting things to learn if you are interested in something new, like Rust of example.

I don't think there is much overlap between the use cases of C#/.NET and rust. Rust would be a low level systems programming language, i.e. a replacement for C++.

While C++ has a place in the .NET ecosystem, there is a reason that C++ and .NET are different beasts and still exist side by side as different universes. CoD and Photoshop are C++, they would probably benefit from being Rust applications.

While in the past you would be well prepared if you knew (say), Haskell, C and Python, a good lineup in the future could be e.g. F# and Rust instead.

Re: Microsoft takes .NET open source and cross-platform

#413

Post by yuhong »

FlyingSnake wrote: post #217
jacquesm wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're still doing bad stuff today, just on different fronts. That said, I hope they give Google and Apple a run for their money, those are (probably) just as bad. The last ruling in the SCO case was a mere 4 years ago.

> They're still doing bad stuff today, just on different fronts. I mean no disrespect, but what's the bad stuff being done my Microsoft today?

I have my own wishlist:

http://yuhongbao.blogspot.ca/2014/08/my-wishlist-for-satya.h...

It also includes things MS has done in the past that is not too late to fix.

Re: Microsoft takes .NET open source and cross-platform

#414

Post by beauzero »

bwy wrote: post #285
[deleted] wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[deleted]

I wouldn't call that an insult, much less a passive-aggressive one. Maybe it's time to get a bit of fresh air; the world's not out to get you.

...or maybe it is...just not billyhoffman.

Re: Microsoft takes .NET open source and cross-platform

#415

Post by com2kid »

jacquesm wrote: post #147
OWaz wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seeing comments like this “I'll never switch back to MS for what they've done in the past” always reminds me of this post from Hanselman http://www.hanselman.com/blog/MicrosoftKilledMyPappy.aspx

- Stacker - Netscape - SCO And many others besides. Companies have reputations just like people do (that's why we call them 'incorporated') and just like you can lose your trust in a person you can lose your trust in a corporation. This is not about Microsoft just doing 'stupid stuff sometimes' it is about institutionalized criminal behavior sanctioned at the highest level of one of the largest software companies in…

I'm just a low level drone here at MS, and I obviously am not involved in any important decisions, but I'd like to add that all the above things happened back when the current generation that works here was growing up. We were all on Slashdot, being outraged and angry 13 year olds. Except now my generation works here, and I think the changes (such as all the ones announced today!) are a good sign of that.

At least since after I went through puberty (I'm not that young!) Microsoft has been acting pretty damn chill.

I guess my main complaint is that people yell at us for sins that were committed by, quite literally, a previous generation.

Re: Microsoft takes .NET open source and cross-platform

#417

Post by rbanffy »

yarou wrote: post #386
jacquesm wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

- Stacker - Netscape - SCO And many others besides. Companies have reputations just like people do (that's why we call them 'incorporated') and just like you can lose your trust in a person you can lose your trust in a corporation. This is not about Microsoft just doing 'stupid stuff sometimes' it is about institutionalized criminal behavior sanctioned at the highest level of one of the largest software companies in…

>This is not about Microsoft just doing 'stupid stuff sometimes' it is about institutionalized criminal behavior sanctioned at the highest level of one of the largest software companies in the world. Welcome to American corporate culture :) You have to keep in mind that Microsoft had a monopoly for a very long time. While their actions may, in your world view, be "criminal", as a corporation Microsoft was acting comp…

Maximizing shareholder value would also include, I suppose, keeping the company reputation good enough so that talented people would still want to work with them and their products. That's not what happened here. I too was a Microsoft enthusiast once, but their bad behavior made me turn my back on them. Jacques and myself are certainly not alone in that decision.

Re: Microsoft takes .NET open source and cross-platform

#418

Post by yuhong »

jacquesm wrote: post #147
OWaz wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seeing comments like this “I'll never switch back to MS for what they've done in the past” always reminds me of this post from Hanselman http://www.hanselman.com/blog/MicrosoftKilledMyPappy.aspx

- Stacker - Netscape - SCO And many others besides. Companies have reputations just like people do (that's why we call them 'incorporated') and just like you can lose your trust in a person you can lose your trust in a corporation. This is not about Microsoft just doing 'stupid stuff sometimes' it is about institutionalized criminal behavior sanctioned at the highest level of one of the largest software companies in…

My personal favorite is the OS/2 2.0 fiasco.

Re: Microsoft takes .NET open source and cross-platform

#419

Post by venomsnake »

wvenable wrote: post #262
venomsnake wrote: post #16

I welcome it. And still think it is 10 years too late. 2.0 was a blast and provided higher quality of life and speed of contemporary JAVA. If they had made it multiplatform back then the world would have been different.

They probably didn't have the resources back then to make it multiplatform. It would be a distraction from providing the core features of the platform. Now that the platform is mature, it's a good time to do it.

You mean they could release Rotor under crap licence? But could not make .NET multiplatform? Doubt it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shared_Source_Common_Language_I...

This was the CLI

Re: Microsoft takes .NET open source and cross-platform

#420

Post by jbooth »

bad_user wrote: post #400
jbooth wrote: post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's a random line from the Scala standard collections library: def :+[B >: A, That](elem: B)(implicit bf: CanBuildFrom[Repr, B, That]): That This is from the standard collections library. In Java, I've got a List.add function. In case it's not clear from the name, 'add', I can click through to the implementation and it's pretty obvious what's happening. In Scala, I've got +, ++, +:, :+, and a bunch of other nonsen…

For a Scala developer that signature makes sense. You want to add an element of type B to your collection with elements of type A, however the addition of an element of type B may not be supported (e.g. you may want to add a String to a BitSet and get in return a plain Set[Any]), so the above works only as long as there is a builder available that can build the new collection. The function also works on covariant col…

I agree that Option types are great, so great that I'm happy to work in a much 'weaker' language, use option types, and solve 90% of the problems that more 'theoretically robust' languages address with none of their downsides.

As far as not understanding how awesome immutable data structure are.. I'd take a step back before you make assumptions about what other people understand. Do you know anything about cache hierarchy and memory models on modern CPUs? Performance is important to some of us.

Post reply on HN