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

311–320 of 428 posts

Re: .NET 6 Released

#311

Post by Anon4Now »

mrweasel wrote: post #168
abdusco wrote: post #24

> In .NET 6, in-memory single file apps have been enabled for Windows and macOS. In .NET 5, this deployment type was limited to Linux. You can now publish a single-file binary that is both deployed and launched as a single file, for all supported OSes. Single files apps no longer extract any core runtime assemblies to temporary directories. This is a great! Now I can publish statically linked executables and run it e…

Wait, wait… .Net can build “static linked” executables that doesn’t require that I install .Net to run? I had no idea, I guess it’s time to revisit .Net

After almost 18 years, Joel finally got his wish:

https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2004/01/28/please-sir-may-i-h...

Re: .NET 6 Released

#312

Post by ClumsyPilot »

TillE wrote: post #32
slownews45 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Replace ".NET" with "Windows" maybe? AS a longtime original VB/Winforms developer - MS lost their mind on desktop development and didn't look back. They chased EVERY fad that could be chased. Silverlight, UPF, XAML, WPF, Islands, MAUI. This is one of those things - imagine if they'd focused on building an amazing and cross platform (ultimately) toolkit with just a basic drag and drop designer? Who cares about "stylin…

Also if you still need to support XP (even back when it was still getting patches), forget it, Microsoft has no interest in supporting you. Even if you want to use the latest and greatest UI, your customers need to keep up too. Completely unworkable.

XP is 20 years old, its older than invasion of Afganistan.

Re: .NET 6 Released

#313

Post by runevault »

throw868788 wrote: post #301
runevault wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

They are working in .NET 5 last time I checked. Opened an FSX script, "#r: nuget SwaggerProvider", point to a JSON API and it seems to work with IDE auto complete included with 2 lines of code, no project scaffolding, or package manager files required. Things seem to be improving on this front I guess as well. I do agree - source generators have a better API as an implementer and can generate more than classes. I gue…

Oh Myriad looks super interesting. As I figure out what I want to do as I pick f# back up more seriously I'll have to keep this in mind.

Re: .NET 6 Released

#314

Post by naikrovek »

azth wrote: post #162
vb6sp6 wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

yes but then you have to write your program in java

Yes, arguably a better decision than writing it in golang to begin with.

Go is better than Java any day of any week if startup time or memory footprint are of any concern to you at all.

Also Java is OO which is... terrible to say the least.

Re: .NET 6 Released

#315

Post by cyber_kinetist »

ClumsyPilot wrote: post #308
bob1029 wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My strategy for dealing with Microsoft's regrettable desktop GUI roadmap is to use the web as much as possible. .NET has an incredible suite of features for pushing functionality to the browser. Kestrel is one of the fastest web servers available today. Developing directly against the AspNetCore pipeline has a bit of a learning curve, but it becomes very intuitive once you get over the DI/startup hard bits, and the p…

"I would go so far as to argue for deployment of a self-contained webservice to the end users that could be accessed via any arbitrary localhost browser" Might as well use Unity game engine and write your app inside one.

There seems to be some people writing UI applications with the Godot game engine. Given the dismal state of desktop UI frameworks/tools, this seem to make more and more sense (very light binaries, solid cross-platform support, a WYSIWYG toolkit with good scripting functionality, a high-performance 2D renderer, access to C/C++ if you wan to go low-level, you name it.)

Examples:

https://www.wonderdraft.net/

https://github.com/Orama-Interactive/Pixelorama

Re: .NET 6 Released

#316

Post by loic-sharma »

AtNightWeCode wrote: post #74
ziml77 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been waiting for .NET 6 for the past year for the long term support. As much as I wanted to use .NET 5, I figured it would be best to only use LTS releases in production.

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

Disclaimer: I work on .NET

What makes you say that? All versions of .NET - including non-LTS versions - have had an extremely high bar for quality before releasing.

Re: .NET 6 Released

#317

Post by password4321 »

lbriner wrote: post #3

I would personally prefer you to fix the multitude of things that don't work well in Visual Studio and library issues that are continually pushed back as "won't fix" or "upgrade to .Net5/6" as opposed to always racing forwards to the horizon. Even those of us who are actively migrating applications are stuck with web forms, netfx and dotnet core 2/3 and will be for years, so it would be nice that we felt some love ra…

I was surprised to see there wasn't much discussion of this Joel Spolsky classic here:

https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2002/01/06/fire-and-motion/

Think of the history of data access strategies to come out of Microsoft. ODBC, RDO, DAO, ADO, OLEDB, now ADO.NET – All New! [...] the end result is just cover fire. The competition has no choice but to spend all their time porting and keeping up

Maybe Microsoft got out-fire-and-motioned by Node.js for a while but they're working extra hard cranking out new stuff.

Re: .NET 6 Released

#318

Post by spaetzleesser »

abdusco wrote: post #24

> In .NET 6, in-memory single file apps have been enabled for Windows and macOS. In .NET 5, this deployment type was limited to Linux. You can now publish a single-file binary that is both deployed and launched as a single file, for all supported OSes. Single files apps no longer extract any core runtime assemblies to temporary directories. This is a great! Now I can publish statically linked executables and run it e…

Last time I tried it, single-file binaries were super slow on first load. It was one of the reasons we went back to .NET framework. Has this improved?

Re: .NET 6 Released

#319

Post by tasogare »

moogly wrote: post #195
slownews45 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Replace ".NET" with "Windows" maybe? AS a longtime original VB/Winforms developer - MS lost their mind on desktop development and didn't look back. They chased EVERY fad that could be chased. Silverlight, UPF, XAML, WPF, Islands, MAUI. This is one of those things - imagine if they'd focused on building an amazing and cross platform (ultimately) toolkit with just a basic drag and drop designer? Who cares about "stylin…

IMO they need to realize the common denominator of all these failed and deprecated frameworks is the very thing they've desperately clung onto over all these false starts... and that is XAML. Get rid of it.

XAML is good. It's very easy to build interface by nesting components then styling it if needed, and doing data binding. All the web alternatives are harder to use and came 10-20 years later.

Re: .NET 6 Released

#320

Post by osigurdson »

rc_hackernews wrote: post #173
kbd wrote: post #51

Is there any reason I should care about .NET today if I'm not already in the ecosystem? I've done C# professionally in the past, and C# is a good language. I wish Microsoft focused on open source and wider industry adoption for C#/.NET sooner so that it could have taken some share from Java. Now .NET is finally open source but Microsoft is a bad steward of the open source ecosystem for .NET, and I certainly wouldn't…

As someone who programs with .NET in their day job...no probably, not. Outside of a few areas related to DDD, event sourcing, and some distributed-system frameworks (NServiceBus and MassTransit) there's really no killer app for .NET, in my opinion. The big selling point for .NET now is that it runs on Linux...which is not really a selling point in the grand scheme of things.

I'd say the ability to run on Linux is a major selling point. Without this, I think .NET would have largely disappeared.
Post reply on HN