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

.NET 10

devblogs.microsoft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 605 posts

Re: .NET 10

#121

Post by sfn42 »

netdevphoenix wrote: post #95
sfn42 wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they can onboard people who know anything-not-C# and benefit from the .Net library I don't get this mindset. I'd much rather have the new guy spend a few months getting used to a new language, than have an organization where everyone uses different languages. It's a nightmare a few years down the road when you have 20 different projects in 15 different languages and the people who built them are mostly gone. People…

> People love to talk about the right tool for the job, it's all BS This sounds very close minded to me. It is certainly true that there exist tasks if not subdomains where some ecosystems are better than others. Using a hammer for everything might work for you if all your problems are nails. But that doesn't mean that all problems out there are nails

If you can justify with good reasons why you absolutely need this other tool then that's fair game - hence the data science example where I allow for specialists to use specialized languages for specialized tasks.

I'm talking about general software development and web dev in particular. There's a trend where you'll see one org has or web app using .net ad react, another using next.js, another using Java and Vue, one djnago and htmx, and so on.

And there is literally no reason for any of these choices, they're all fairly basic web applications that could have all been made in literally any half decent web stack. So whether the devs who made these choices knew or not, they made them based on preference not any kind of reason or need, they're all nails and any hammer would have done the job just fine.

Re: .NET 10

#122

Post by lol768 »

What is the deal with Ubuntu and this version of .NET?

Every since they got rid of the Microsoft packages feed, it's just been a complete mess.

Ubuntu's own documentation states:

> .NET 10 will be available in the Ubuntu archive for Ubuntu 24.04+ and included in main upon its official release

But it isn't available?

Re: .NET 10

#123

Post by brainzap »

jitbit wrote: post #2

For us, every .NET upgrade since .NET 5 has gone surprisingly smoothly and reduced CPU/RAM usage by 10–15%. We were even able to downgrade our cloud servers to smaller instances, literally. I wish .NET was more popular among startups, if only C# could get rid of the "enterpisey" stigma.

too much microsoft

Re: .NET 10

#124

Post by sfn42 »

ourmandave wrote: post #120
sfn42 wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they can onboard people who know anything-not-C# and benefit from the .Net library I don't get this mindset. I'd much rather have the new guy spend a few months getting used to a new language, than have an organization where everyone uses different languages. It's a nightmare a few years down the road when you have 20 different projects in 15 different languages and the people who built them are mostly gone. People…

It's bad enough when you've got constantly changing "best practices" from MS so the thing you wrote last year doesn't look anything structurally like what you're doing now. And all the 6-month-old on-line docs and tutorials aren't only useless, but time wasting.

So you don't like .NET, that's fine. I'm not saying everyone needs to use .NET. I'm saying pick one thing and stick with it.

That said I think you're exaggerating those complaints, the docs for C# are quite good imo and I've been working with ASP.NET web apps for half a decade so far and I'm not seeing any problems like you're describing.

Maybe you're miffed about the Framework to Core/.NET switch? That was a bit of a doozy but the ecosystem is so much better for it I'd say it was worth it.

Re: .NET 10

#125

Post by dahauns »

thiago_fm wrote: post #65

Changed from Ruby to .NET and loving it. C# is a great language, it's now very modern and has the best parts of Typescript, while leaving out the bad ones. It's also extremely fast and multi-platform. It also doesn't have the fragmentation that Java or JVM langs has. And it's also open source nowadays. I think Sillicon Valley hasn't caught up with those recent changes, I bet more startups would be using C# if they kn…

>and has the best parts of Typescript

I really like C#, but I wouldn't go that far - unions are at least on the horizon, but I've sometimes come to miss the power and flexibility of TS's structural typing...(And so has Hejlsberg, apparently, seeing his reasoning for choosing go over C# for tsc :) )

Re: .NET 10

#126

Post by Razengan »

SideburnsOfDoom wrote: post #114
Razengan wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you also make everyone wear the same clothes, drive the same vehicle, order the same food

> Do you also make everyone drive the same vehicle Good analogy. If, say, your organisation maintains a fleet of cars - it needs to keep them on the road, get them serviced, replace parts, refresh individual cars regularly etc. How many different makes and models do you support? A small org might decide that it only makes sense to support one. A larger org might have the resources for 3 or 4, so that there is 1 or 2…

But different tasks require cars, other tasks require trucks, vans, bicycles, motorcycles..

Re: .NET 10

#127

Post by master-lincoln »

hshdhdhj4444 wrote: post #102
egeozcan wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most of your electronic devices work with embedded software. Production lines, transport gates, cranes, computer hardware, ships, planes, rockets, cars, e-bikes, smart lights... There is also scientific programming, that feeds research and analysis. Weather reports? Statistics, etc. And there is gaming. Devops, infrastructure? Databases? Tools for artists? Most of those aren't web. And yes I've heard of Figma. There…

I really doubt you’re using .NET (it literally is named in the dotcom style and refers to the interNET) in embedded software. In an article about .Net its fair to talk primarily about creating APIs and other internet focused uses.

And you just deduct that from the name? Was .NET created with a focus on web? It seems to me like a generic application framework.

ASP.NET is the web part, no?

Re: .NET 10

#128

Post by martijn_himself »

I usually feel ambivalence with announcements of new C# versions.

Yes, a lot of great features have been added over the years. But it also introduces some amount of cognitive load and confusion. Take the first new feature in the example:

> Field-backed properties simplify property declarations by eliminating the need for explicit backing fields. The compiler generates the backing field automatically, making your code cleaner and more maintainable.

Huh, I thought we have had this for years, what were they called, ah Auto-Implemented Properties- so why is there a need for this? In this example:

  // Automatic backing field with custom logic
  public string Name
  {
      get => field;
      set => field = value?.Trim() ?? string.Empty;
  }
Ah so it's a way to access the backing field of Auto-Implemented Properties if you need more logic. And in the above can we just say:

  get;
or do you need to refer to the field keyword explicitly in the getter if we use it in the setter?

I feel like the documentation is always somewhat lacking in explaining the reasoning behind new features and how it evolves the language from earlier versions.

Re: .NET 10

#129

Post by ethin »

How is .NET debugging on the command line? I don't use IDEs that often and last time I tried making something serious with .NET I couldn't find any kind of reliable debugger that I could just spin up and get to grips with. And I wasn't exactly very keen on switching from VS build tools to full VS just to debug .NET apps.

Re: .NET 10

#130

Post by sfn42 »

Razengan wrote: post #126
SideburnsOfDoom wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Do you also make everyone drive the same vehicle Good analogy. If, say, your organisation maintains a fleet of cars - it needs to keep them on the road, get them serviced, replace parts, refresh individual cars regularly etc. How many different makes and models do you support? A small org might decide that it only makes sense to support one. A larger org might have the resources for 3 or 4, so that there is 1 or 2…

But different tasks require cars, other tasks require trucks, vans, bicycles, motorcycles..

Yeah, .NET is a truck and React is a bicycle. Nobody sad you can't use different tools for different tasks.

I'm saying use one tool for one task. One type of truck. One type of bicycle. Maybe some companies need both a small and a large truck. That's all fine as long as you actually need it.

Just don't let every dev choose their own because you're gonna have a hell of a time maintaining that fleet.

Post reply on HN