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

61–70 of 605 posts

Re: .NET 10

#61

Post by littlecranky67 »

olavgg wrote: post #47
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.

As a startup, what is it in for me to switch from Java, Spring Boot, Hibernate, Beam, Flink, Pulsar, Vault, KeyCloak ecosystem to C#.Net? Is the documentation better? Do I get better performance? Is the community larger and more stable?

Yes.

Re: .NET 10

#62

Post by Hawxy »

kurokawad wrote: post #46
monerofglory wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The go-to nowadays is System.Text.Json, developed by the same person as Newtonsoft.Json, built in to .NET. Newtonsoft.Json as the primary JSON serializer (at least in every place I've worked) has NOT been the case versus System.Text.Json for years. Though it certainly used to be the case.

Uh okay! I was not aware of this. Thanks for pointing that out. Why is there so much difference in the NuGet downloads between both libraries tho?

> Why is there so much difference in the NuGet downloads between both libraries tho?

Because there's a boatload of older .NET apps that have been using Newtonsoft for over a decade already and aren't in a rush to switch. Anything built on .NET Framework is likely to still use Newtonsoft.

Re: .NET 10

#64

Post by greener_grass »

leetharris wrote: post #5
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. Too hard to ignore the benefits of cross-stack gains in Typescript/Python. The C# native phone, Blazor, etc just isn't quite there yet. Tried it at the last company, and full stack TS was just so much easier to do. The reality is that the vast majority of startups don't make it. The #1 thing startups should be focusing…

What are the cross-stack gains of Python?

Running TypeScript on the server is a well trodden path. It can be pretty fast too. Python on the client, not so much.

Re: .NET 10

#65

Post by thiago_fm »

Changed from Ruby to .NET and loving it.

C# is a great language, it's now very modern and has the best parts of Typescript, while leaving out the bad ones.

It's also extremely fast and multi-platform.

It also doesn't have the fragmentation that Java or JVM langs has.

And it's also open source nowadays. I think Sillicon Valley hasn't caught up with those recent changes, I bet more startups would be using C# if they knew.

Re: .NET 10

#66

Post by [deleted] »

oaiey wrote: post #3
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.

Can only confirm that. Such a smooth platform overall for web and API development. We use it with several 100 devs on it and the choice never failed us, neither in technology or hiring. And it is not that we have .NET gurus or anything.

[deleted]

Re: .NET 10

#67

Post by JaggerJo »

lolive wrote: post #60
cies wrote: post #28

That's a lot of goodies in a new release! It seems it is outpacing the JVM's development...

Apart from [the equivalent of] records, I see nothing big. Except... this '''let! a = fetchA() and! b = fetchB()''' really puzzles me. Does C# have a high-level syntax for concurrency timing? [something that Java is strongly lacking, and that Typescript did solve with Promise.all(), which is an ugly syntax, from my perspective] Any elaboration on this is very welcome.

The code snippet is in F#. And F# has so called "computation expressions".

Re: .NET 10

#68

Post by littlecranky67 »

phito wrote: post #18
cebert wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can easily use the same types and libraries in your backend and frontend with TypeScript. It’s not at easy with dotnet.

OpenAPI and client generators solve this issue easily.

I would love this to be true, but it isn't. I've done generating types for the frontend multiple times, sometimes from C# (around 2016, using typelite), Java (openapi template generator) and most recently straight from OpenAPI spec files (.yaml) using Orval.

It always has been a shitshow. It works well for the 90% cases, but in the 10% edge cases, things break. It becomes impossible to fix generation issues, you will often resort in working around issues in your backend/openapi code. Sometimes you report bugs upstream and hope it gets fixed. In the current project we are stuck on a ~2year old Orval version (a typescript generator from openapi) because some features broke or were removed in the latest version, and the entire monorepo (15+ LoB apps) wouldn't compile and would require major changes. This simply because a never version of the generator was broken/removed features previously present.

Re: .NET 10

#69

Post by ralferoo »

> Today, we are excited to announce the launch of .NET 10, the most productive, modern, secure, intelligent, and performant release of .NET yet.

It looks like they got someone from Apple to write their press release.

Re: .NET 10

#70

Post by Xelbair »

tinyspacewizard wrote: post #42
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.

Start-ups should strongly consider F#. It's a force multiplier when you have a small team of strong developers.

>startups should consider niche language with extremely limited hiring pool.

sure, but only if you're doing something that actually demands it - and actual innovation - instead of usual 'lets repackage XYZ as SaaS and growthhack' strategy.

Post reply on HN