3 ms·

"A small built in webserver" is exactly what ASP Core now gives you. ASP.NET was never previously about providing that, and it wasn't a thing until fairly recen

by cmdkeen 11y ago

"A small built in webserver" is exactly what ASP Core now gives you. ASP.NET was never previously about providing that, and it wasn't a thing until fairly recently. Now with Kestrel you only need a handful of lines of code to spin up a web server. The whole point of Core is that MS have rewritten .Net and ASP to learn the lessons of more modern languages. ASP.NET 4.6 is standing on 19 years of cruft which is why it has so many weird and complicated parts.

mrweasel 11y ago
>Now with Kestrel you only need a handful of lines of code to spin up a web server. OWIN is also just a handful of lines, it's just very confusing. Based on the Kestrel examples I've seen I wouldn't say they've improved much. I would argue that Microsoft hasn't learnt anything from "modern language" (.NET/C# is still a modern language in it self). In some areas Microsoft seems to hit a spot right in between "convention over configuration" and total flexibility via configuration and it's extremely confusing.
otis_inf 11y ago
> The whole point of Core is that MS have rewritten .Net and ASP to learn the lessons of more modern languages. ASP.NET 4.6 is standing on 19 years of cruft which is why it has so many weird and complicated parts. MS hasn't rewritten .NET, most code is simply ported from .NET full. ASP.NET has been rewritten, but only a part of it (the rest is simply not implemented (yet)). '19' years of cruft? .NET 1.0 was released in 2002, not sure where your 19 years come from. Besides, it's better to use a framework that actually works and does whatever you throw at it, than some hip new thing that can only do a few tricks today and perhaps learns a few more tomorrow. You know, clients and all, they want to use the stuff you write and not have to stare at things that break down / crash.
- cmdkeen 11y ago
  ASP (i.e. ASP Classic) is 90s though, and plenty of its legacy lives on for instance in the ASP.NET Request object. ASP Core isn't going to be able to do "a few tricks" when it's released, it's going to be production ready for a wide range of standard tasks with significant benefits for newer architectures like micro services. "Clients and all" might like having scalability options that don't involve waiting 20 minutes for an AWS Windows VM to spin up for instance...

by cmdkeen 11y ago

mrweasel 11y ago

>Now with Kestrel you only need a handful of lines of code to spin up a web server. OWIN is also just a handful of lines, it's just very confusing. Based on the Kestrel examples I've seen I wouldn't say they've improved much. I would argue that Microsoft hasn't learnt anything from "modern language" (.NET/C# is still a modern language in it self). In some areas Microsoft seems to hit a spot right in between "convention over configuration" and total flexibility via configuration and it's extremely confusing.

otis_inf 11y ago

> The whole point of Core is that MS have rewritten .Net and ASP to learn the lessons of more modern languages. ASP.NET 4.6 is standing on 19 years of cruft which is why it has so many weird and complicated parts. MS hasn't rewritten .NET, most code is simply ported from .NET full. ASP.NET has been rewritten, but only a part of it (the rest is simply not implemented (yet)). '19' years of cruft? .NET 1.0 was released in 2002, not sure where your 19 years come from. Besides, it's better to use a framework that actually works and does whatever you throw at it, than some hip new thing that can only do a few tricks today and perhaps learns a few more tomorrow. You know, clients and all, they want to use the stuff you write and not have to stare at things that break down / crash.

cmdkeen 11y ago
ASP (i.e. ASP Classic) is 90s though, and plenty of its legacy lives on for instance in the ASP.NET Request object. ASP Core isn't going to be able to do "a few tricks" when it's released, it's going to be production ready for a wide range of standard tasks with significant benefits for newer architectures like micro services. "Clients and all" might like having scalability options that don't involve waiting 20 minutes for an AWS Windows VM to spin up for instance...