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

Microsoft takes .NET open source and cross-platform

news.microsoft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

431–440 of 937 posts

Re: Microsoft takes .NET open source and cross-platform

#431

Post by yuhong »

jacquesm wrote: post #185
us0r wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your M.O. is to shit on anything Microsoft. Microsoft, Google, Apple and every other F500 company has engaged in "institutionalized criminal behavior sanctioned at the highest level" yet I don't recall seeing you in other threads.

You're way out of line. I dislike Google and Apple right about as much as I dislike Microsoft, the only difference there is that they seem to have a lesser string of convictions behind their names (for now, give them some time). If you really took the time to go through my posting history you'd see that I'm pretty evenhanded. Of the big companies I use google where I can't avoid it, don't have a facebook account, the…

I personally focus on fixing them. I was glad when Vic Gundotra was fired, and I think even Facebook is better than the old days.

Re: Microsoft takes .NET open source and cross-platform

#432

Post by rip747 »

_stephan wrote: post #102
_stephan wrote: post #62

"We are open sourcing the RiyuJit and the .NET GC and making them both cross-platform." That's incredible!

Apparently the .NET runtime and Mono will merge: https://twitter.com/shanselman/status/532558786486370304

reading that tweet brought back feeling of the whole Rails, Merb merge. Awesome to hear!

Re: Microsoft takes .NET open source and cross-platform

#433

Post by taylorlapeyre »

ffreire wrote: post #353
brodo wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Scala, there are just too many ways to do things. It's optimized for flexibility and easy writability. C# on the other hand may be a little more verbose, but at least everyone can read everyone elses code.

IMHO this works to Scala's detriment. I very much enjoy Python and Clojure precisely because they have one, generally accepted way of doing things. Is it a silver bullet? Of course not, but this works for me 9 times out 10 and I find that coming back to my code later (or sharing with colleagues) is far easier because most code will be structured in a familiar way and therefore take less time to understand the unique…

Clojure is my favorite language by far, but there's hardly "have one, generally accepted way" of doing everything.

Re: Microsoft takes .NET open source and cross-platform

#434

Post by jacquesm »

deeviant wrote: post #427
jacquesm wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is absolutely true but even in the present Microsoft has anything but clean hands: http://euobserver.com/political/125868 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_Ventures http://www.networkworld.com/article/2466540/software/munich-... And on and on.

Right, but would own an Apple product? That's terrible, they exploit horrible treatment of rightless Chinese wage-slaves. Would you use a google product? They are double-faced went in come to net neutrality, only putting their weight on points that promote their own benefit. They also buy up tons of extremely innovative start-ups, then suffocate them under the weight of their glacial bureaucracy and pedantic squabbli…

I'm sure you could go on all day but this thread is about microsoft. Apple's products are not welcome here because of their walled garden approach and Google has done far worse than making a faux-pas in the net neutrality debate. Agreed on the buying up innovative start-ups and then killing them off, that's really bad and acqui-hires are hurting all start-ups.

Re: Microsoft takes .NET open source and cross-platform

#435

Post by yarou »

jacquesm wrote: post #394
yarou wrote: post #386

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>This is not about Microsoft just doing 'stupid stuff sometimes' it is about institutionalized criminal behavior sanctioned at the highest level of one of the largest software companies in the world. Welcome to American corporate culture :) You have to keep in mind that Microsoft had a monopoly for a very long time. While their actions may, in your world view, be "criminal", as a corporation Microsoft was acting comp…

> As a public corporation, they have an obligation to maximize value for shareholders. I keep hearing that but I don't actually believe that is true. http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/harold-meyerson-the-m...

Perhaps obligation is a poor word choice. I meant it more in the sense of the invisible hand and rationality. As a rational actor, Microsoft was maximizing their utility, given whatever their utility function/curve is.

Re: Microsoft takes .NET open source and cross-platform

#436

Post by jacquesm »

com2kid wrote: post #415
jacquesm wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

- Stacker - Netscape - SCO And many others besides. Companies have reputations just like people do (that's why we call them 'incorporated') and just like you can lose your trust in a person you can lose your trust in a corporation. This is not about Microsoft just doing 'stupid stuff sometimes' it is about institutionalized criminal behavior sanctioned at the highest level of one of the largest software companies in…

I'm just a low level drone here at MS, and I obviously am not involved in any important decisions, but I'd like to add that all the above things happened back when the current generation that works here was growing up. We were all on Slashdot, being outraged and angry 13 year olds. Except now my generation works here, and I think the changes (such as all the ones announced today!) are a good sign of that. At least si…

I would not hold it against you that you make a living with MS, that said in the present they do plenty of stuff that they really shouldn't. So it's not just the previous generation, the current one is also anything but clean.

Re: Microsoft takes .NET open source and cross-platform

#437

Post by cma »

yarou wrote: post #386
jacquesm wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

- Stacker - Netscape - SCO And many others besides. Companies have reputations just like people do (that's why we call them 'incorporated') and just like you can lose your trust in a person you can lose your trust in a corporation. This is not about Microsoft just doing 'stupid stuff sometimes' it is about institutionalized criminal behavior sanctioned at the highest level of one of the largest software companies in…

>This is not about Microsoft just doing 'stupid stuff sometimes' it is about institutionalized criminal behavior sanctioned at the highest level of one of the largest software companies in the world. Welcome to American corporate culture :) You have to keep in mind that Microsoft had a monopoly for a very long time. While their actions may, in your world view, be "criminal", as a corporation Microsoft was acting comp…

If you aren't allowed to criticize a company because "as a public corporation, they have an obligation to maximize value for shareholders," then that means their profitability calculation no longer has to include bad PR, because nothing will be bad PR once someone like you points out that the corporation had to do it--it's all very circular.

Re: Microsoft takes .NET open source and cross-platform

#438

Post by jbooth »

saosebastiao wrote: post #396
jbooth wrote: post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's from the standard collections library, the most-used code in any language. It is in fact representative of the vast majority of code you use. The fact that it wasn't immediately clear to you that a lot of your code DOES use this code is probably the strongest argument I could make.

You have inferred more about me than you are entitled, and even if you were right, your argument is still poor. Have you read the c# stdlib? It is in no way any better. Stdlibs are always more complex than the code that builds on them, and that is by design. The same code that I use for a oneliner has to be robust enough to apply to play, akka, spark, finagle, etc. That is the primary reason why StdLib documentation…

I inferred that you probably use standard library collections. Not really an insulting inference, it'd be insulting to assume you didn't.

Personally, I make it a habit to always read (or try to read, in this case) standard library source code that I'm depending on to be correct.

Re: Microsoft takes .NET open source and cross-platform

#439

Post by jacquesm »

imanaccount247 wrote: post #393
jbooth wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably because, A), it was an uncalled-for digression into language wars, and B), now that we're here anyways, a lot of us think the majority of features in scala and Haskell for that matter are fundamentally misguided. My goal is not to write elegant code, but to write the least complex code with the lowest cognitive overhead. TCO, 10x the man-hours in maintenance and all that. If the choice is between having to w…

How can you think they are "fundamentally misguided" if you don't even know what they are? The category theory strawman is the absolute laziest, most absurd piece of FUD you could possibly resort to. It is even worse than the old "perl is bad because I don't want to read line noise" nonsense, at least that had some loose tie to reality.

Missed opportunity to explain why those are 'fundamentally misguided'.

Re: Microsoft takes .NET open source and cross-platform

#440

Post by louthy »

jakevn wrote: post #343
jbooth wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You find C# harder than this? trait SeqLike[+A, +Repr] extends Any with IterableLike[A, Repr] with GenSeqLike[A, Repr] with Parallelizable[A, ParSeq[A]] { self => or def :+[B >: A, That](elem: B)(implicit bf: CanBuildFrom[Repr, B, That]): That

[SerializableAttribute] [ComVisibleAttribute(false)] public class Dictionary : IDictionary , ICollection >, IDictionary, ICollection, IReadOnlyDictionary , IReadOnlyCollection >, IEnumerable >, IEnumerable, ISerializable, IDeserializationCallback Both languages can be difficult to decipher. I do find that Scala's syntax is much more flexible, which can lead to more stumbling when trying to read code.

I'm a fan of C#, although I prefer F#; however I have to agree, I think the choice of for generic definitions was a real mistake, it can be so hard to parse. The side effect of this is that first-class functions (Func) are chronically underused by C# programmers.

Annoyingly F# brought them along for the ride too, although you rarely have to explicitly write them.

Post reply on HN