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

411–420 of 605 posts

Re: .NET 10

#411

Post by piskov »

whizzter wrote: post #246
GiorgioG wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Recommended by whom? I've been doing .NET for 23 years (since the first beta) and I've never paid for a single library in any commercial project I've been part of.

Moq, lots of PDF libraries, Avalonia, Automapper, MediatR, MassTransit,Telerik stuff,etc. I'm not inherently against it, we have a problem with opensource being asymmetrically underfunded and if people going commercial is the cost perhaps we've failed.

For pdfs render the, in html with razor and then print as;df with puppeteer. If you need custom headers/footers, add something like https://github.com/PejmanNik/puppeteer-report-csharp

Re: .NET 10

#412

Post by [deleted] »

zamalek wrote: post #386
delaconcha wrote: post #364

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just install the .NET SDK, and you’re ready to go. > Nuget is complete and utter garbage. You still have to resort to all forms of unreliable hacks in order to redirect it to a locally clone How so, you can use a nuget.config in your project and use your local packages fairly easy, seems in part with npm and the likes.

"Just" is an incredibly obnoxious word when used in the way that you have. > Just install Not on Debian? Have fun with that. You'll also need the Azure SDK. And what about openssl-dev? Oh no, you installed dotnet on Windows instead of within WSL? Start again. No, you don't "just install" the SDK. There is a lot that the IDEs set up for you. > Local nuget.config I don't see how adding a nuget config improves anything.…

[deleted]

Re: .NET 10

#413

Post by to11mtm »

ourmandave wrote: post #144
SideburnsOfDoom wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the thing you wrote last year doesn't look anything structurally like what you're doing now... all the 6-month-old on-line docs and tutorials aren't only useless, but time wasting. This is indeed a complete exaggeration.

Sorry, I love .NET and have used it from it's rollout back in 2002. I'm just fondly remembering the ASP.NET MVC churn or more recently, Azure API whiplash.

I get you actually.

MVC churn was real, EF Churn was real, heck NETCORE itself was a (at least warned about) churn, 3.1->6.0 was minor but still definitely a thing [0].

[0] - Now that I'm thinking it out loud, maybe that's why they changed the branding from .NET CORE to just .NET; The churn was more or less 'done'...

Re: .NET 10

#414

Post by neonsunset »

Timon3 wrote: post #292
thiago_fm wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Might be my own taste, but except a few of the common and easy to understand structural typing code, I find it sometimes actually make things needlessly complex. I also write lots of Typescript, and the furthest I go is to use 'Omit' and other utility types, but already feel like it's too much.

I've come to really appreciate Typescripts structural typing, because it reduces some of the overhead & prevents the unnecessarily tight coupling that has often annoyed me in other languages. The overhead argument seems fairly objective to me - clean code with low coupling in C# et al. requires separate definitions of interfaces and implementations, explicit conversion methods between compatible interfaces etc. This…

[dead]

Re: .NET 10

#416

Post by to11mtm »

AshleyGrant wrote: post #392
paulirwin wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Avalonia is FOSS (MIT licensed). You only need Avalonia XPF if you are migrating legacy stuff. Moq is largely unnecessary today with LLMs being able to easily generate mock classes. I personally prefer to hand-roll my mocks, but if you prefer the Moq-like approach, there's NSubstitute (3-BSD). Automapper and MediatR are both libraries I avoided prior to the license change anyways, because I don't like runtime "magic"…

Any recommendation of good alternatives to Telerik? We've been using it for years, but I'm open to considering alternatives even though it doesn't cost me anything to pay for the license.

Depends on what layer of Telerik [0]. Honestly of late since I'm extra rusty on frontend I just get Copilot with Claude to help generate UI widgets since that's allowed.

Before that, years ago, I just YOLOed with WebSharper and built composition helpers to make 'spartan but correct' UIs that could be prettied up with bootstrap if needed.

That said, alas, Bolero (what replaced WebSharper) is F# specific rather than also supporting C#.

I mostly bring those up because they have various libraries out there to work with different JS bits.

[0] - Cries in webforms

Re: .NET 10

#417

Post by leobuskin »

el_benhameen wrote: post #397
skeeter2020 wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are quite a few gotchas for this, especially web apps. THis is understandable because it was added after the fact, vs. a first-party design requirement. It's cool and might work for you, but taking a non-trivial .net codebase to native AOT can be tough, and if you're starting greenfield, why go .net?

FWIW, the .net folks seem to have put a lot of effort into the native AOT pipeline in the last few releases. We have a large, non-trivial application with a fair amount of legacy code, and getting it AOT’d in .net 10 (targeting wasm, even!) was not an insane lift.

How is the WASM target looking nowadays? I tried it in 2023 and early 2024, and it was far from complete (JS interop, poor documentation scattered across GitHub issues, and so on). I still can't find a single trustworthy source of documentation on how to proceed. C# would look great at the edge (Cloudflare Workers).

Re: .NET 10

#418

Post by bouke »

lol768 wrote: post #122

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?

See the docs[1] where it mentions that 10 is supported, but not available in the built-in Ubuntu feed. It however is/should become available in the backports feed.

To make matters even more interesting the GitHub / Azure DevOps CI agent image Ubuntu 24.04 doesn't provide .NET 9, whereas 22.04 does[2]. .NET 10 appears to become available in both though[3].

[1]: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-gb/dotnet/core/install/linux-... [2]: https://github.com/actions/runner-images/issues/12697 [3]: https://github.com/actions/runner-images/pull/13295

Re: .NET 10

#419

Post by AshleyGrant »

to11mtm wrote: post #410
wvenable wrote: post #373

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had high hopes for Blazor but it didn't really materialize. Instead I'm just sticking with Angular. I don't think Microsoft doesn't know what to do with .NET. I think it continues on a very logical and direct path. But they have no idea what to do with UI on any platform. Luckily they haven't even deprecated any of the existing options and on the web, at least, you have all the same options as every other platform.

Blazor honestly is great for 'I need to write a simple backend control plane for whatever'. I.e. internal only stuff where you care about just shipping something functional and don't care too much how it all looks/etc. Further you go away from that circle, the less enticing it is.

Why is that? Do you speak from real-world experience?

Not trying to push back. We're planning to use it for some new projects we have coming up on our team of .NET devs who can't seem to grok Angular or React and the entire ecosystem of tooling required, so I'm looking for reasons we shouldn't use it aside from Blazor being rather unpopular compared to Angular/React/other JS libs

Re: .NET 10

#420

Post by SegfaultSeagull »

nicoburns wrote: post #210
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.

> I wish .NET was more popular among startups, if only C# could get rid of the "enterpisey" stigma. I tried .NET and liked C# as a language. But even though the language and runtime are now open source, it seemed like a lot of the recommended libraries were still commercially licensed, which was an immediate nope from me. I've never encountered that in any other ecosystem.

What is wrong with paying for something that is useful?
Post reply on HN