3 ms·

C# and .Net the framework is objectively 'good'. ASP.Net MVC, is very subjective. It definitely is very 'weird' from the perspective of being on a static langu

by apalmer 11y ago

C# and .Net the framework is objectively 'good'. ASP.Net MVC, is very subjective. It definitely is very 'weird' from the perspective of being on a static language platform but embracing 'magic' over standard type safety. I will give you routing though, i dont really think it 'sucks' but i have lead development teams using MVC for years... whenever a new developer who isnt familiar comes on board, the most significant 'learning curve' is the routing... i am not really a fan myself but i understand what the value proposition is...

cmdkeen 11y ago
But because it is .Net you have all sorts of libraries which bring you type safety if you want it. Things like T4MVC and Typelite combined with Entity Framework give me compile time impacts of impacts anywhere in my stack from the DB downwards. If you're writing projects measuring in the person-years of effort then these tools are vital, if you're writing something smaller then the "magic" is quite nice.
mercurial 11y ago
It's not a problem of learning curve, it's that when you come from something like Jersey, it feels very limited.
- adrianlmm 11y ago
  Jersey is a framework for REST services, the equivalent would be MS Web API, not ASP.NET MVC.
  - mercurial 11y ago
    That's really a weird way of thinking about it. As something like Dropwizard demonstrates, it's a very good base for a web framework. Take Spring's routing, if you prefer, even that is better.
    - adrianlmm 11y ago
      Why is weird? you do spect that Spring MVC gives you a full Restful experience?, it can give you a good REST experience, but is not for that, the same case with ASP.NET MVC is not spected to give a premier example is RESTFul services that is why Web API exists, and as someone who has used both, Java and .NET, I can tell you that Web API is simpler and as powerfull.
      - mercurial 11y ago
        It's weird because there is no good reason to force you to use a different routing system in order to use REST routing. It's especially surprising considering how Rails-inspired it is otherwise.
        adrianlmm 11y ago
        Obviously you are misinformed, becuase ASP.NET MVC and Web API share the same Route Handler, heck, even I could make my own framework and use the same Route Handler, because it is a decoupled module, so, I invite you to learn more about the topic before making such ignorant statements.
        mercurial 11y ago
        I invite you to be more civil. As for .NET MVC, the fact remains that the default routing system is fairly mediocre, for no particular reason, while many other frameworks offer more flexibility with one system. Now, if it's good for you, by all means, keep using it.
        adrianlmm 11y ago
        >I invite you to be more civil I can be civil till certaint point, but how to be more civil when you have no idea of what you are talking about and instead of admiting it you just keep making more ignorant statemens?, just say "I have no clue" and that's it, nobody is going to judge you. >the fact remains that the default routing system is fairly mediocre, for no particular reason You keep repeating the same as a broken record, yet, you have presented zero evidence, there is no route that I have implemented in Java that I wasn't able to replicate in the same way or even more easily in .NET, be it MVC or Web Api, so please, present some evidence or go home.

by apalmer 11y ago

cmdkeen 11y ago

But because it is .Net you have all sorts of libraries which bring you type safety if you want it. Things like T4MVC and Typelite combined with Entity Framework give me compile time impacts of impacts anywhere in my stack from the DB downwards. If you're writing projects measuring in the person-years of effort then these tools are vital, if you're writing something smaller then the "magic" is quite nice.

mercurial 11y ago

It's not a problem of learning curve, it's that when you come from something like Jersey, it feels very limited.

adrianlmm 11y ago
Jersey is a framework for REST services, the equivalent would be MS Web API, not ASP.NET MVC.
- mercurial 11y ago
  That's really a weird way of thinking about it. As something like Dropwizard demonstrates, it's a very good base for a web framework. Take Spring's routing, if you prefer, even that is better.
  - adrianlmm 11y ago
    Why is weird? you do spect that Spring MVC gives you a full Restful experience?, it can give you a good REST experience, but is not for that, the same case with ASP.NET MVC is not spected to give a premier example is RESTFul services that is why Web API exists, and as someone who has used both, Java and .NET, I can tell you that Web API is simpler and as powerfull.
    - mercurial 11y ago
      It's weird because there is no good reason to force you to use a different routing system in order to use REST routing. It's especially surprising considering how Rails-inspired it is otherwise.
      - adrianlmm 11y ago
        Obviously you are misinformed, becuase ASP.NET MVC and Web API share the same Route Handler, heck, even I could make my own framework and use the same Route Handler, because it is a decoupled module, so, I invite you to learn more about the topic before making such ignorant statements.
        mercurial 11y ago
        I invite you to be more civil. As for .NET MVC, the fact remains that the default routing system is fairly mediocre, for no particular reason, while many other frameworks offer more flexibility with one system. Now, if it's good for you, by all means, keep using it.
        adrianlmm 11y ago
        >I invite you to be more civil I can be civil till certaint point, but how to be more civil when you have no idea of what you are talking about and instead of admiting it you just keep making more ignorant statemens?, just say "I have no clue" and that's it, nobody is going to judge you. >the fact remains that the default routing system is fairly mediocre, for no particular reason You keep repeating the same as a broken record, yet, you have presented zero evidence, there is no route that I have implemented in Java that I wasn't able to replicate in the same way or even more easily in .NET, be it MVC or Web Api, so please, present some evidence or go home.