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

.NET 6 Released

devblogs.microsoft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 428 posts

Re: .NET 6 Released

#291

Post by kumarvvr »

jiggawatts wrote: post #264
orthoxerox wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

.NET 6 (or 5, or Core 3.1) is absolutely fine for personal projects. The tooling is great, it runs on Windows and Linux, the web stack is miles better than Spring Boot. But if your personal projects are a stepping stone to a programming job, then .NET has a monstrous legacy problem. In 2002-2007 a lot of code was written using .NET in enterprises: it was the best way to write a rich desktop application for Windows an…

This wouldn't matter so much except that Microsoft completely broke all backwards compatibility for ASP.NET web applications. There's no "wizard" upgrade. I'm working on migrating an ASP.NET 4.0 application right now, and it's basically stuck in the past. Physically, yes, it could be updated by the developers to work on .NET 6.0, but no manager will ever fund this. They don't understand the benefits, and no amount of…

> but no manager will ever fund this

Looks like the way to convince them is to tell them we will be moving to a microservices based stack and slowly start building the services on modern stacks (and gRPC)

Re: .NET 6 Released

#292

Post by SigmundA »

WorldMaker wrote: post #141
SigmundA wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So no excuse for .Net 6 since there was no ASP MVC 6 right?

There was. ASP.NET MVC 6 and EF6 were the last versions for .NET Framework 4.x. Hopefully with .NET 7 next year and all the versions aligned they will drop the "Core" name for just ASP.NET 7 and EF7.

Asp Mvc 6 was never released, it basically became MVC Core 1.

Re: .NET 6 Released

#293

Post by chunkyks »

qwertox wrote: post #252
abdusco wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's exactly what it is. You can even cross-compile for all supported platforms. $ dotnet new console -n HelloWorld $ dotnet publish --project HelloWorld -r osx-arm64 --self-contained -o out -p:PublishTrimmed=true $ du -sh out 10M

Wow... I didn't know. Since when can it do this?

I've been using this for at least a year or two. With their stripping, my binaries (which use very little other than system.* and math.*) are 12M in size on each OS. I tested with today's release of version six, the binaries are about 1M smaller each.

Re: .NET 6 Released

#294

Post by keithnz »

Smaug123 wrote: post #248
keithnz wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you can actually do them pretty easily in C# without language support anyways. for instance, the F# example from https://fsharpforfunandprofit.com/posts/designing-for-correc... can be done in C# like https://gist.github.com/keithn/ceeeed5f7eb567e1b2333747065d1... almost similar amount of code, however, no exhaustive checking. Not that I find that to be much of a problem, but it would be nice

But who needs sum types when you have the visitor pattern :troll_face: https://blog.ploeh.dk/2018/06/25/visitor-as-a-sum-type/

wow.....that is one way to do it.....yes. I would hate to think what a system would look like with many sum types in it

Re: .NET 6 Released

#296

Post by dirkg »

I moved from C# to the NodeJs/JS/React world a while ago, when React was fairly new as well.

I like JS as a language and the enormous progress thats been made in the JS ecosystem from the wild west days back then. But I have to say my most productive and enjoyable dev experience was with VS, C#, ReSharper etc.

Magical intellisense and real refactoring across millions of LOCs and multiple assemblies, all kinds of tools, visual designers, powerful 3rd party toolkits (anyone remember Infragistics), amazing docs. And of course now it'd be much better I'm sure.

Re: .NET 6 Released

#297

Post by throwaway_85202 »

metaltyphoon wrote: post #155
AtNightWeCode wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I never run anything else than LTS in production. The in-between versions have basically been beta quality since .NET 1-preview.

Crazy how bing.com seem to not care for "beta" software :D

Bing.com developers are "first-party customers", they can raise issues internally, and these issues are prioritized

Re: .NET 6 Released

#298

Post by kinjba11 »

jiggawatts wrote: post #264
orthoxerox wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

.NET 6 (or 5, or Core 3.1) is absolutely fine for personal projects. The tooling is great, it runs on Windows and Linux, the web stack is miles better than Spring Boot. But if your personal projects are a stepping stone to a programming job, then .NET has a monstrous legacy problem. In 2002-2007 a lot of code was written using .NET in enterprises: it was the best way to write a rich desktop application for Windows an…

This wouldn't matter so much except that Microsoft completely broke all backwards compatibility for ASP.NET web applications. There's no "wizard" upgrade. I'm working on migrating an ASP.NET 4.0 application right now, and it's basically stuck in the past. Physically, yes, it could be updated by the developers to work on .NET 6.0, but no manager will ever fund this. They don't understand the benefits, and no amount of…

This. In many ways .NET Framework is to .NET Core/6 as Python 2 is to Python 3. The new stuff is all phenomenal, truly. But there are mountains of code running right now, responsible for billions of dollars of economy, still being maintained and added to, that will never be ported to the new. One wonders how our young industry of software development will evolve into the future, how many COBOLs are being created as we speak. Old cars, planes, bridges, buildings and roads eventually stop working and break down, but code is code. Or is it?

Re: .NET 6 Released

#299

Post by runevault »

throw868788 wrote: post #277
runevault wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It might not be full second class but I dunno I'd go all the way to first class. For example F# doesn't support the source generators feature that came with .NET 5 (unless they added it in 6 and I missed it but when I looked at that post you linked I didn't recall seeing it).

They got type generators which somewhat influenced and predates the Source Generator feature by a few years. Not the same thing of course, and from what I've seen are slightly different in target/scope. (e.g. F#'s seems more appropriate for scripting where you can use it without a proj entry).

Do you mean type providers? That's their own type of nice thing but to your point it is only for generating types, source generators can generate much more than a basic type. Also I swear I saw somewhere type providers were not functioning as well in newer .NET but that was hearsay as I never tried them in 5 and now 6.

Re: .NET 6 Released

#300

Post by yyyk »

WorldMaker wrote: post #140
vyrotek wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And Entity Framework Core unfortunately because EF6 was already a thing.

Yeah, hopefully as others have pointed out, with .NET 7 next year all the version numbers align so that ASP.NET and EF can drop "Core" again.

There was an EF7 RC1 version, and .NET 7 isn't LTS. Dropping "Core" is better done in .NET 8 - or MS could pick an entirely new name.
Post reply on HN