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

421–430 of 605 posts

Re: .NET 10

#421

Post by to11mtm »

whizzter wrote: post #270
paxcoder wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can confirm that (several years ago at least) free PDF libraries were lacking, and Telerik was always non-free. However, aren't Moq, Avalonia and MassTransit free software? As for Automapper and MediatR, their owner changed from a free software license to only an open source one (Reciprocal Public License), but these are probably the simplest libraries of the ones you mentioned and have either been forked (MagicMap…

Yeah pdf libraries are a bit of a mess, I work with a product that handles lots of PDF documents and I think we just recently added another PDF library dependency (I'm certain it's at least 3 now, but could be 4 or even 5 libraries loaded at startup). Moq has the appearance of free software but bundled some spyware stuff (seemingly "benign" "Sponsorlink" for getting donations). Masstransit went commercial recently, h…

> Moq has the appearance of free software but bundled some spyware stuff (seemingly "benign" "Sponsorlink" for getting donations).

Well they pulled back but the trust was broken in a lot of cases. I am still fine with it 'for now' but IDK NSubstitute always feels weird to me, maybe that's just how I was taught to use it tho.

> Masstransit went commercial recently

I mean good for them but thankfully it's also giving attention to other projects that are FOSS or Open Core...

As far as the other stuff, I've never seen AutoMapper used in a way that couldn't literally be handled with a static/extension method in 'real' code. Yes it can be useful but it is often grossly overused.

MediatR is cool but TBH I'd rather just reach for Akka.NET or MessagePipe instead; If you're abstracting out to keep processing backend 'swappable' you should be able to handle any of the above for the choice you make anyway.

Re: .NET 10

#422

Post by wvenable »

rblatz wrote: post #389
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.

I avoided Blazor, despite multiple people on my teams pushing for it. It always felt like it fit in the same space as web forms and silverlight. A product created to fill a gap of developers that wrote desktop apps and don't want to learn how to write front end code for the web. Plus it binds you to the product lifecycle of a .net side project that likely will be abandoned. While Blazor has some cool stuff built in,…

Honestly, I was wishing that Blazor was in the same space as web forms.

There is a market for front-end development that isn't steeped in the hell of actual front-end development. Blazor is almost the right idea but I think this incarnation is a dead end. Somebody needs to gather up all the pieces and figure it out for real.

Re: .NET 10

#423

Post by parliament32 »

tracker1 wrote: post #339
parliament32 wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the key problem is that a large number of startups are shipping software in containers, and dotnet requiring a CLR is not particularly well-suited for containerization. It's like the old school Java JVM model. You have to ship a copy of the runtime with every container, and if you're doing proper microservices it's an awful lot of overhead. Yes I'm aware MS makes it easy to build containers and even single ex…

If you use the same base image, is it really as bad as you're making it out to be? I understand that you're getting a roughly 100mb dist directory for a .Net web app, and that it uses quite a bit of ram.. but people also use Node and Java which have similar issues. Don't get me wrong on this, I'd like to use Rust+Axum a lot more and C# a bit less.. but I don't dislike C#.

The runtime alone is a bit over 200mb, and that doesn't include additional packages you'll most likely need.

That being said, I'd much prefer to deploy a C# application over Node or Java, no argument there. But saying "I wish more startups were using C#" makes me wince. C# seems well-suited for the monolith-architected VM-image-deployed strategy of the early 2000s, but it's pretty close to being the exact opposite of modern best practices. And unfortunately it's kinda unfixable in a language that depends on a VM execution environment.

I'm sure all this is short-lived however -- I'm relatively confident we'll see deployment best practices converge down to "use whatever language you want but you must compile to WASM" in the next decade, so the warts of devs' chosen language aren't an ops problem anymore.

Re: .NET 10

#424

Post by gf000 »

troupo wrote: post #362
gf000 wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and most language features don't feel bolted on like with Java (anything from functional programming to extension methods to whatever) Java doesn't have extension methods and while both are decent languages, C# is the one that likes implementing every conceivable language feature immediately, while Java takes a while to design a bigger feature that will replace several smaller ones' use cases.

> while Java takes a while to design a bigger feature that will replace several smaller ones' use cases. Java is quite busy also implementing features that are small in other languages like text blocks. And I wish Java would design bigger features that would replace several "smaller ones", but that is almost never the case. It's almost always just a new big feature bolted on to the language that is almost there, but…

> Java is quite busy also implementing features that are small in other languages like text blocks.

It's a small feature which is immediately understandable by anyone coming straight from Java 1.2, it doesn't materially increase the complexity of the language and is arguably one of the best implementation among different languages. So not really sure if it's a good counterpoint.

Meanwhile records arrived several versions ago with sealed interfaces/classes on the horizon already, so now they together form a complete ADT feature. Pattern matching builds on top. And sure, these are no novel features, MLs had this decades ago, but the implementation is very nice, with minimal additional developer complexity and some small DX improvement (records replace the majority of Bean usages). In the future, withers may come that would help with both object initialization AND record "mutation". Where Java spends more development budget is on the runtime side, e.g. virtual threads can replace async code in many cases, so the language doesn't have to get all the complexity of an async feature.

Meanwhile C# has many many "one-off" features and they really can have unexpected interactions and make the language quite a bit harder to understand. Some of them are absolutely wonderful, but I am on a "the-smaller-the-merrier" language team.

Re: .NET 10

#425

Post by vips7L »

troupo wrote: post #362
gf000 wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and most language features don't feel bolted on like with Java (anything from functional programming to extension methods to whatever) Java doesn't have extension methods and while both are decent languages, C# is the one that likes implementing every conceivable language feature immediately, while Java takes a while to design a bigger feature that will replace several smaller ones' use cases.

> while Java takes a while to design a bigger feature that will replace several smaller ones' use cases. Java is quite busy also implementing features that are small in other languages like text blocks. And I wish Java would design bigger features that would replace several "smaller ones", but that is almost never the case. It's almost always just a new big feature bolted on to the language that is almost there, but…

> Java is quite busy also implementing features that are small in other languages like text blocks.

Or named parameters or compile time null safety. Everyday I inch closer to moving over to C# from Java.

Re: .NET 10

#426

Post by lpribis »

1970-01-01 wrote: post #407

.NET has to win the title for worst naming. If you didn't know what it was, this announcement makes no sense whatsoever. All you would guess is there are probably 9 others that were just like it.

> All you would guess is there are probably 9 others that were just like it.

Lol, even this is not true. For the current runtime/stdlib package known as ".NET", they started numbering at 5. The actual sequence (only counting major version numbers) is: .net framework 1, 2, 3, 4, .net core 1, 2, 3, .net 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10. Easily the worst naming/version history for any product (worse than Windows).

Re: .NET 10

#427

Post by omcnoe »

mexicocitinluez wrote: post #151
christophilus wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really liked working with C#. I spent 15 years or so with it and found it very productive. But no; I don’t miss the culture of C# / Microsoft shops at all.

> culture of C# / Microsoft shops at al What do you mean?

My biggest complaint would be a tendency to blindly use a "Microsoft first" approach to selecting tech rather than evaluating things on their own merits in the context of their own use cases.

Some Microsoft stuff is really good but it's not universally true. And in the worst cases you end up locked into some hard to migrate off platform that is withering on the vine.

Re: .NET 10

#428

Post by to11mtm »

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.

In the last 12-15 years, outside of imaging and PDF (and some office documents [0]) the only commercial .NET library I found worth it's salt was the the Devart Oracle client, if only because it sucked WAY less than the official one [1].

Yes, that includes UI frameworks. Honestly nowadays I'd just have an LLM help build my UI components, because every commercial UI component lib I've seen is never quite right to a shop I've worked at anyway and you see a bunch of kludges bolted on to make it work the way they want [2].

I guess maybe a list of the recommended libraries would help cause I'm a bit lost.

[0] - You can totally do Excel output from .NET without a commercial library, I know you used to be able to hack together a PDF output flow, Word docs well good luck dealing with that format...

[1] - Devart's lib was both x86 and x64. Oracle's you had to pick the right arch on build. And then make sure everything on the deployment chain was configured the same way, or deal with people forgetting and then burning cycles with broken stuff. That ROI on that alone was worth it to the org.

[2] - To be clear I try to avoid touching such UIs encountered, when I do I at least try to clean things up if possible... but often it's not which is why I have to bring it up.

Re: .NET 10

#429

Post by oaiey »

mohaine wrote: post #193
mexicocitinluez wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> culture of C# / Microsoft shops at al What do you mean?

Been awhile since I've worked at one but it is usually grounded in trying to achieve 100% MS usage. It is rarish to find a partial MS shop. Most of this is how hard MS makes it to use other tools. Even in 2025 they have good interop with external tools hamstrung. Example: SQL Servers JDBC driver will convert an entire table's of data from ASCII to UTF and a full table scan instead of convertering your UTF bind to ASC…

There is no way a reasonable person would not deploy to Linux and postgres for cost reasons alone. No one wants to pay Microsoft or Oracle money for databases, operating systems or frameworks nowadays.

Re: .NET 10

#430

Post by omcnoe »

Xelbair wrote: post #138
bonesss wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

F# is less popular, but it’s a first class .Net language with full MS support and integration onto .Net (VM and ecosystem). C# has been tracking F# and aiming for language parity for years (ie all your modern C# devs should be learning the same language facilities). F# is multi-paradigm so C# devs can write idiomatic C# with minor forced changes. And as a .Net language you can always decompile it into C# and keep goi…

don't get me wrong - i want F# features in C#! I like the ecosystem and both languages. I'm just pointing out that no matter how cool the language is if it doesn't serve business needs(hiring, onboarding ,ease of replacing staff, target market) it won't be picked.

I've worked with a lot of junior devs/graduates on a large F# project, in that context hiring/onboarding for F# hasn't at all been a limiting factor. Ultimately F# is not a particularly difficult language to learn.
Post reply on HN