121–130 of 351 posts
The .NET ecosystem is giving me a lot of confidence these days. I've been on this rollercoaster since .NET Core 2.x and don't think I will be getting off any time soon. We recently upgraded from 3.1 to 6, which was a total non-event. The code base that was around for Core 2.x is still the same one we have today. Some substantial changes made to the web interfaces and hosting, but nothing in the business logic or data…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> too few selling points There are significant performance improvements, and the new language features of C# depend on the later versions - that might not be such a big deal, but it will become more acute as the language improves.
You can get most of the new language features to work with .Net Framework by overriding the LanguageVersion in the build. I did this to get nullable type annotations and pattern matching to work when I inherited a .Net Disaster. There are a few that require compiler interop which don't work, like using new syntax on records for specifying the fields (e.g., "record A(int a, int b)").
Records can be enabled like this [1]
[1] https://github.com/louthy/language-ext/blob/main/LanguageExt...
Meh. In the end, Microsoft will betray those who trusted it. Long term, better just to pretend it does not exist and never, ever depend on anything with Microsoft name on it.
I wonder if this opens the door for .NET applications to be included in Ubuntu? Neither this blog post nor Ubuntu’s [1] mention that as a possibility. Just thinking from a Ubuntu package level, where libraries live in packages separate from executables, it might be possible to create library packages using the result of ‘dotnet store’. Then executable packages could reference them when running ‘dotnet publish’. [2] T…
I'm not sure going back to shared runtime libs is worth the headache but I guess if you were really resource constrained but running .NET it would work for you.
I've recently been working with a C# app that's based on a nearly out of support .net 3.X version I think. It's fully inherited from a tech partner, but we have free reign to modify it as needed. I was excited to try and port it from a Windows only older .net app to .net core 6, but unfortunately too much of it doesn't have a simple to port to equivalent in .NET 6 and it would require us to completely rewrite it. Thi…
Not sure if this is what you mean, but vs_installer.exe supports command line arguments like --add, so you should be able to craft a giant command line for IT to copy. Used it for work for the NodeJS equivalent of your use case.
I don't keep up with desktop dev, but can I develop a Linux UI using C# and .NET yet?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The debugger is part of Visual Studio, which is a paid product. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to not publish the source for it.
Yeah, but the general standard is for open languages to either have an open debugger (e.g.: V8 JS) or else otherwise have support for an open debugger interface (e.g.: Rust via GDB). It's not strictly unreasonable for MS to offer a proprietary debugger, but it is bass-ackwards for the core .NET team to not offer an open source debugger or open standards compliant debugger interface to go with their open source langua…
And I think lldb works with .NET apps.
Quoted post unavailable.
Not what that means. "embrace" as in EEE means embracing some pre-existing open source standard, prior to "extend"ing it with features and quirks that people start relying on. Thus making the standard irrelevant if the implementation that everyone actually uses is different. .NET is their own thing to begin with and nobody suggests rewriting core pieces of Linux with it. It would be more accurate to say, based on the…
The .NET ecosystem is giving me a lot of confidence these days. I've been on this rollercoaster since .NET Core 2.x and don't think I will be getting off any time soon. We recently upgraded from 3.1 to 6, which was a total non-event. The code base that was around for Core 2.x is still the same one we have today. Some substantial changes made to the web interfaces and hosting, but nothing in the business logic or data…
I just jumped on the .NET Core gravy train after 6+ years of Ruby on Rails development. I feel so productive and confident working with .NET. Ill be riding this rollercoaster with you for a while!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Old .net has become ".net framework". I'm just glad the number-space has been sorted out. It was annoying to learn that ".NET 2", ".NET Standard 2" and ".NET Core 2" are very different things.
> Old .net has become ".net framework". From my understanding, thats not quite right. AFAIK framework was adapted to differentiate it from standard, core and mono.