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

.NET Core 3.0

devblogs.microsoft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 183 posts

Re: .NET Core 3.0

#31

Post by thrower123 »

The_rationalist wrote: post #21
hmexx wrote: post #13

List of performance improvements is mind-boggling: https://devblogs.microsoft.com/dotnet/performance-improvemen... How could a mature standard library / frameworks have so much performance gains to be had?

Would be really nice to see performance comparisons against a chromium equivalent for the same UX.

Memory usage difference should be something like an order of magnitude better with .NET.

It's not a direct comparison, because the features aren't quite the same, but the Electron Teams app uses about 10x more memory than the relatively heavy WPF Skype for Business client that it's supposed to replace.

Re: .NET Core 3.0

#32

Post by 9wzYQbTYsAIc »

hmexx wrote: post #13

List of performance improvements is mind-boggling: https://devblogs.microsoft.com/dotnet/performance-improvemen... How could a mature standard library / frameworks have so much performance gains to be had?

A lot of work was done recently with compiler optimizations and using hardware intrinsics for core functions.

Re: .NET Core 3.0

#33

Post by grokys »

fortran77 wrote: post #27
Analemma_ wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's a combination of monopoly effects plus the benefits of open source: back when .NET was closed-source and only available on Windows, the only way to ship a performance improvement was if an individual developer at Microsoft could convince his boss it was worth it. And it was rarely worth it, because .NET only ran on Windows, its only customers were .NET-only enterprise shops who weren't about to move to a…

The "proprietary" .NET was very performant. It's the new "open" one that has to catch up.

.NET Core isn't based on Mono.

Re: .NET Core 3.0

#34

Post by benbristow »

steverb wrote: post #20
atonse wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve thought about this but I doubt it. The big change has been the perception shift. .NET was always really solid tech. Microsoft has always had stellar developer technology. But the love affair with open source and the super villain role that Microsoft played, is what kept people away, not the tech itself. I remember wanting to give a talk about how amazing C# was to a ruby group. I never did it, but it was definit…

I actually went from C# (WebForms) to Ruby (Rails) and then back to C# (MVC).

Rails is still pretty good. I'd probably use it if I were starting a new project still.

Can even do Type-checking now thanks to Stripe! https://sorbet.org/

Re: .NET Core 3.0

#35

Post by com2kid »

mcdermott wrote: post #24

C# (the default .Net lang) has so much ceremony, boilerplate/scaffolding and IDE dependence (IDE programmers) and OOP overhead that it requires 5x more lines of code than the same app in Python or Go. Every time my interest peaks, I take a look leave with the same feeling that it's a dated/bloated OOP relic and would take all the joy out of programming. I've also noticed that most C# programmers don't usually know an…

C# has very minimal boilerplate for a lot of uses. I can throw together a simple CRUD UI app in WinForms in well under a day. Visual Studio handles writing all the data binding code for me, code that I'd have to write myself in any other language.

Using one of the enterprise frameworks, sure, those all have boilerplate, in any language, especially the older frameworks.

And for some tasks, the amount of boilerplate is tiny. I can write out a struct/class with property names matching my JSON, and watch as C# automatically data binds the JSON to a UI. The amount of boilerplate I need to do that in the browser is pretty much identical, or I can learn / figure out some fancy auto-binding toolkit that has its own boiler plate and learning curve.

You can be seriously functional in C#. Passing around lambdas and using functional techniques to manipulate data has been idiomatic C# for over a decade.

> I've also noticed that most C# programmers don't usually know another language

Stereotyping is not good. I If you go to most corporate dev places, you will find a significant population of single language devs. Same things happen with any popular corporate language. While I agree that learning multiple programming languages makes for better developers, blaming a language for being popular is hardly fair.

Heck the number of developers who have historically only worked in C/C++ was really high for multiple decades.

Re: .NET Core 3.0

#36

Post by mirekrusin »

dragonwriter wrote: post #10
atonse wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve thought about this but I doubt it. The big change has been the perception shift. .NET was always really solid tech. Microsoft has always had stellar developer technology. But the love affair with open source and the super villain role that Microsoft played, is what kept people away, not the tech itself. I remember wanting to give a talk about how amazing C# was to a ruby group. I never did it, but it was definit…

> But rubyists would’ve loved C#. As a Rubyist, I'll admit that C# is the least bad of the C++/Java style of static OOP languages, but it was that it was always too tied to the .NET ecosystem and heavyweight enterprise tooling more than Microsoft's “supervillian role” with regard to FOSS that made it unattractive for lots of places where I would want to use Ruby. That's improved with Core, somewhat.

It improved with mono and it's great to see continuation with core by ms. I don't use it atm but I remember learning c# from their beta book before v1, it was better than java even at that time. I've used c# from objective-c macos app maybe 6 years ago, it was pleasure to write c#/objc interop with mono and see same codebase used on windows app working fine (even faster) on macos via mono. The state must look much nicer now whan 6y ago, if I see opportunity to write some c# code now, I won't have any personal reservations, I'll do it with pleasure.

ps. my personal favourite programming languae at the moment is by far Julia and I encourage anybody to have a peek at it - I've missed it somehow[1] [2]; followed by crystal

[1] https://youtu.be/DRKKAFYM9yo [2] https://youtu.be/HAEgGFqbVkA

Re: .NET Core 3.0

#37

Post by michannne »

mcdermott wrote: post #24

C# (the default .Net lang) has so much ceremony, boilerplate/scaffolding and IDE dependence (IDE programmers) and OOP overhead that it requires 5x more lines of code than the same app in Python or Go. Every time my interest peaks, I take a look leave with the same feeling that it's a dated/bloated OOP relic and would take all the joy out of programming. I've also noticed that most C# programmers don't usually know an…

That was a lot of predispositions. I can say for sure I've never scaffolded anything in C#, I can write a fully functional web app using Notepad++, the different parts of the startup are not hard to memorize, and I can't imagine scaffolding being useful in a console application.

Yeah, it requires more lines to achieve the same thing in other languages, that isn't a pro or con.

And myself personally, I started with Basic, and have used C++, C, Python, Java, JS and C# throughout my career, but I'm also sure you can find many more Python/Go developers who only know Python/Go

It'a unfortunate you don't like the language and I hope Microsoft and the open-source developers continue to add more features so that one day you'll find the joy may developers have found in using C#

Re: .NET Core 3.0

#38

Post by Dude2029 »

mcdermott wrote: post #24

C# (the default .Net lang) has so much ceremony, boilerplate/scaffolding and IDE dependence (IDE programmers) and OOP overhead that it requires 5x more lines of code than the same app in Python or Go. Every time my interest peaks, I take a look leave with the same feeling that it's a dated/bloated OOP relic and would take all the joy out of programming. I've also noticed that most C# programmers don't usually know an…

Break the bubble, talk to more C# devs from different kinds of businesses.

Re: .NET Core 3.0

#40

Post by DenisM »

The only way to get C# 8 is to move to .NET Core, I can't really avoid this anymore. And for me it means moving to ASP.NET Core...

Anyone recently migrated projects from ASP.NET MVC to ASP.NET Core? I hope there is a gradual way, like this: https://www.hackernoon.com/how-to-migrate-project-from-aspne...

Post reply on HN