6 ms·

Moving from Node.js to ASP.NET Core

98 points by asp_net 10y ago

edzo 10y ago
broken link , losers
- sctb 10y ago
  Please don't post like this on Hacker News. https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
untog 10y ago
Just to throw out the obvious: it should be trivial to get some old Node code up and running, particularly if you don't mind using an old runtime version. If you've run npm shrinkwrap you have a log of the exact versions of each package used. You don't have to use ES6 or Typescript, you can keep on trucking the same as you ever did. It sounds like the author was an ASP.NET developer, dabbled a little in Node, then worked with Xamarin (also .NET) then moved to ASP.NET Core. Nothing wrong with any of that, but it only stands to reason you'll find ASP.NET easier to work with than Node when you've used it extensively and Node not very much at all.
- CSMastermind 10y ago
  As a node developer, I've learned the value of shrinkwrap the hard way. I imagine many companies don't use it until it comes back to bite them. I've had to deal with downstream dependencies breaking things in our dev environments more than I care to admit. I'd suspect that most old node projects of any meaningful size won't just boot up and run without some tinkering.
  - vmasto 10y ago
    Thankfully Yarn is here to solve most (if not all) of these problems.
jinglebells 10y ago
Why weren't they using nvm? Did they have a build server? I'm confused how it suddenly stopped working, but TBH I got a bit confused and bored.
taurath 10y ago
Rather lacking in details on what actually went wrong. Then, instead of figuring it out the best solution is just to switch stacks? Seems a bit.. lazy to me. Tons of breaking changes between 2 years ago node and current stable node.. that's like.. 0.12.x to 6.x? Is it a package issue? I've not had a problem as long as my package config was the same.
throwayedidqo 10y ago
I can't figure out the circle jerk around Node. Debugging sucks A LOT, JS syntax sucks, single thread sucks, NPM is filled with 95% junk. Python, Java, golang, C#, and maybe even PHP have more mature and reasonable stacks.
- taurath 10y ago
  What you stated IS the circle jerk. I can't come to a single thread mentioning node without 1/4 of the comments being your complaints.
- cx1000 10y ago
  I completely agree. The fact that there are so many abstractions that compile/transpile into javascript is also a big red flag. What other languages do you see that in? And then of course there is the horrible standard library, where the most obvious functions don't exist and require a package and maintainer. https://mobile.twitter.com/mitsuhiko/status/712624914071728128 https://mobile.twitter.com/mitsuhiko/status/7126249140717281... https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/4bjss2/an_11_line_npm_package_called_leftpad_with_only/?st=J1182X6I&sh=d6f61965 https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/4bjss2/an_11_l...
  - vmasto 10y ago
    I find it extremely telling that both of the issues you linked are now included in the core language library, and what happened with left-pad will never happen again after amends were made by npm to make sure that it indeed never does. If you want to critize JavaScript you can do better with something more substantial. If anything, the speed at which problems you linked get remedied is a plus for the language. Even more so if you take into account the extremely unique position JavaScript is in where you can simply never change an API after it goes public. > The fact that there are so many abstractions that compile/transpile into javascript is also a big red flag What did you expect? JavaScript is the only language browsers natively understand. If you want to write code in your favorite programming language you will have to transpile/compile it to JS.
    - 10y ago
manis404 10y ago
If you're getting paid to write a post about it, you could have at least made an effort to make this story more credible. SAD!
muse900 10y ago
I personally find the title could better be worded "Moving my blog from Node.js to ASP.NET" or "I just found out that ASP.NET got much better than it used to be" When I first read the title I thought it was a node.js dev moving to ASP.NET. TL;DR The poster of the blog found out that ASP.NET fits his needs better, since he seems more capable on that bit etc and he wants to highlight that ASP.NET has improved a lot towards supporting other platforms than Windows and other capabilities other than webforms etc.
Avalaxy 10y ago
"very mature und stable" Sorry but please don't spread these kind of lies. I love .NET Core to death, but the ecosystem is VERY immature. Just today I have been trying to authenticate with the Azure API for 8 hours because: 1) There is barely any support for .NET Core in the Azure SDK. 2) The documentation on the website is very outdated and does not take .NET Core into account. For example the documentation about Table Storage is talking about a TableQuery function that does NOT exist for .NET Core (and this isn't mentioned anywhere), the Azure Webjobs SDK does NOT support .NET Core (again, never mentioned anywhere). 3) .NET Core itself and the tooling surrounding it is full of bugs still. Yesterday I've been trying to reference the TableEntity class in my file, but VS couldn't find it anywhere. I've been trying really hard to get it working, even decompiling the source code to see what's up, but in the end apparently I just had to unload the project and reload it. Developing for .NET Core is still very, very, very painful. So many things will break and will not be supported (yet).
- skrowl 10y ago
  .NET core itself is actually very very stable. The TOOLING for .NET core is what's in flux the most right now.
  - sundvor 10y ago
    Hey, c'mon, we hit 1.0 on the tooling _weeks_ ago, with VS2017. Net Core has only been out since end of June last year. ;) /s (I started working on a .net Core project in January last year, transitioning into it as a new language from PHP/Coldfusion - perhaps not the ideal learning path with all the changes between the betas/RCs yet quite exciting at the same time) Now that we're here, though, we have e.g. NCrunch working with Core and from this point on it's becoming much more viable to develop in.
  - AxelValtysson 10y ago
    You can claim that it's very stable but the ecosystem (support, tooling, community, etc) is simply not there yet to make .NET core one of the most attractive techs in the market right now.
igtztorrero 10y ago
Are you crazy ??????
YCode 10y ago
One critical thing I don't feel the article answers is why you would want to move to .NET, what the advantages are over Node.js, TypeScript et al. I don't mean this as criticism, I'm working on some Node/TS projects and I'm very interested to hear the strengths .NET has over Node.
- rbanffy 10y ago
  I have the impression he used Node in 2014, never touched it again, didn't want to catch up and was already familiar with ASP.NET.
- Rapzid 10y ago
  I've been working with TypeScript a lot over the past year and prefer it to some other languages now(like Python). I would still probably prefer C# and dotnet; all the way if it ran in the browser. * .Net is faster * ASP.NET Core is faster * .Net uses thread pools for task scheduling; parallelism * Run time type information * An mostly complete task(async/await) based stdlib(node hasn't even started on this to my knowledge) * Linq -> fantastic * Entity Framework -> not without some quirks, but fantastic * Roslyn; feeding dev-time code generation back into your compiler/tools allows for some really cool IDE aware tooling. * Cool JIT/IL stuff like Jil * More number types than "number" * etc
detay 10y ago
Just did the opposite. So far so good.
- vyrotek 10y ago
  From Core specifically? Any additional insight?
planetjones 10y ago
He moved from a dynamically served website using node.js backed by mongo DB to a website that reads markdown files in asp.net and renders them. The website is his personal blog. Alternatively the author could have used Hugo and generated his site statically before deploying it.
git-pull 10y ago
There's absolutely nothing wrong with having a static website, but there are already tools like pelican, hugo, jekyll, sphinx and stuff that are better suited for it. So while I'm happy for the person's effort and that he got to use Azure, the more glaring thing is I suspect he could be happier using a static site generator. Also Armin Ronacher released a new one late 2015, Lektor. https://www.getlektor.com/ https://www.getlektor.com/ Show me a team replacing their medium-sized django or rails website with ASP.net Core. Or a YCombinator startup huddling up to their screens late at night in Visual Studio pushing code to azure. And them shipping and making customer's happy.
mmargerum 10y ago
Do you really need to stick a an animated gif in the middle of the article? The one thing I would say about JS on the server is writing EJS templates is much faster than something like razor. Otherwise, go trumps node in every other way.

98 points by asp_net 10y ago

edzo 10y ago

broken link , losers

sctb 10y ago
Please don't post like this on Hacker News. https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

untog 10y ago

Just to throw out the obvious: it should be trivial to get some old Node code up and running, particularly if you don't mind using an old runtime version. If you've run npm shrinkwrap you have a log of the exact versions of each package used. You don't have to use ES6 or Typescript, you can keep on trucking the same as you ever did. It sounds like the author was an ASP.NET developer, dabbled a little in Node, then worked with Xamarin (also .NET) then moved to ASP.NET Core. Nothing wrong with any of that, but it only stands to reason you'll find ASP.NET easier to work with than Node when you've used it extensively and Node not very much at all.

CSMastermind 10y ago
As a node developer, I've learned the value of shrinkwrap the hard way. I imagine many companies don't use it until it comes back to bite them. I've had to deal with downstream dependencies breaking things in our dev environments more than I care to admit. I'd suspect that most old node projects of any meaningful size won't just boot up and run without some tinkering.
- vmasto 10y ago
  Thankfully Yarn is here to solve most (if not all) of these problems.

jinglebells 10y ago

Why weren't they using nvm? Did they have a build server? I'm confused how it suddenly stopped working, but TBH I got a bit confused and bored.

taurath 10y ago

Rather lacking in details on what actually went wrong. Then, instead of figuring it out the best solution is just to switch stacks? Seems a bit.. lazy to me. Tons of breaking changes between 2 years ago node and current stable node.. that's like.. 0.12.x to 6.x? Is it a package issue? I've not had a problem as long as my package config was the same.

throwayedidqo 10y ago

I can't figure out the circle jerk around Node. Debugging sucks A LOT, JS syntax sucks, single thread sucks, NPM is filled with 95% junk. Python, Java, golang, C#, and maybe even PHP have more mature and reasonable stacks.

taurath 10y ago
What you stated IS the circle jerk. I can't come to a single thread mentioning node without 1/4 of the comments being your complaints.
cx1000 10y ago
I completely agree. The fact that there are so many abstractions that compile/transpile into javascript is also a big red flag. What other languages do you see that in? And then of course there is the horrible standard library, where the most obvious functions don't exist and require a package and maintainer. https://mobile.twitter.com/mitsuhiko/status/712624914071728128 https://mobile.twitter.com/mitsuhiko/status/7126249140717281... https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/4bjss2/an_11_line_npm_package_called_leftpad_with_only/?st=J1182X6I&sh=d6f61965 https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/4bjss2/an_11_l...
- vmasto 10y ago
  I find it extremely telling that both of the issues you linked are now included in the core language library, and what happened with left-pad will never happen again after amends were made by npm to make sure that it indeed never does. If you want to critize JavaScript you can do better with something more substantial. If anything, the speed at which problems you linked get remedied is a plus for the language. Even more so if you take into account the extremely unique position JavaScript is in where you can simply never change an API after it goes public. > The fact that there are so many abstractions that compile/transpile into javascript is also a big red flag What did you expect? JavaScript is the only language browsers natively understand. If you want to write code in your favorite programming language you will have to transpile/compile it to JS.
  - 10y ago

manis404 10y ago

If you're getting paid to write a post about it, you could have at least made an effort to make this story more credible. SAD!

muse900 10y ago

I personally find the title could better be worded "Moving my blog from Node.js to ASP.NET" or "I just found out that ASP.NET got much better than it used to be" When I first read the title I thought it was a node.js dev moving to ASP.NET. TL;DR The poster of the blog found out that ASP.NET fits his needs better, since he seems more capable on that bit etc and he wants to highlight that ASP.NET has improved a lot towards supporting other platforms than Windows and other capabilities other than webforms etc.

Avalaxy 10y ago

"very mature und stable" Sorry but please don't spread these kind of lies. I love .NET Core to death, but the ecosystem is VERY immature. Just today I have been trying to authenticate with the Azure API for 8 hours because: 1) There is barely any support for .NET Core in the Azure SDK. 2) The documentation on the website is very outdated and does not take .NET Core into account. For example the documentation about Table Storage is talking about a TableQuery function that does NOT exist for .NET Core (and this isn't mentioned anywhere), the Azure Webjobs SDK does NOT support .NET Core (again, never mentioned anywhere). 3) .NET Core itself and the tooling surrounding it is full of bugs still. Yesterday I've been trying to reference the TableEntity class in my file, but VS couldn't find it anywhere. I've been trying really hard to get it working, even decompiling the source code to see what's up, but in the end apparently I just had to unload the project and reload it. Developing for .NET Core is still very, very, very painful. So many things will break and will not be supported (yet).

skrowl 10y ago
.NET core itself is actually very very stable. The TOOLING for .NET core is what's in flux the most right now.
- sundvor 10y ago
  Hey, c'mon, we hit 1.0 on the tooling _weeks_ ago, with VS2017. Net Core has only been out since end of June last year. ;) /s (I started working on a .net Core project in January last year, transitioning into it as a new language from PHP/Coldfusion - perhaps not the ideal learning path with all the changes between the betas/RCs yet quite exciting at the same time) Now that we're here, though, we have e.g. NCrunch working with Core and from this point on it's becoming much more viable to develop in.
- AxelValtysson 10y ago
  You can claim that it's very stable but the ecosystem (support, tooling, community, etc) is simply not there yet to make .NET core one of the most attractive techs in the market right now.

igtztorrero 10y ago

Are you crazy ??????

YCode 10y ago

One critical thing I don't feel the article answers is why you would want to move to .NET, what the advantages are over Node.js, TypeScript et al. I don't mean this as criticism, I'm working on some Node/TS projects and I'm very interested to hear the strengths .NET has over Node.

rbanffy 10y ago
I have the impression he used Node in 2014, never touched it again, didn't want to catch up and was already familiar with ASP.NET.
Rapzid 10y ago
I've been working with TypeScript a lot over the past year and prefer it to some other languages now(like Python). I would still probably prefer C# and dotnet; all the way if it ran in the browser. * .Net is faster * ASP.NET Core is faster * .Net uses thread pools for task scheduling; parallelism * Run time type information * An mostly complete task(async/await) based stdlib(node hasn't even started on this to my knowledge) * Linq -> fantastic * Entity Framework -> not without some quirks, but fantastic * Roslyn; feeding dev-time code generation back into your compiler/tools allows for some really cool IDE aware tooling. * Cool JIT/IL stuff like Jil * More number types than "number" * etc

detay 10y ago

Just did the opposite. So far so good.

vyrotek 10y ago
From Core specifically? Any additional insight?

planetjones 10y ago

He moved from a dynamically served website using node.js backed by mongo DB to a website that reads markdown files in asp.net and renders them. The website is his personal blog. Alternatively the author could have used Hugo and generated his site statically before deploying it.

git-pull 10y ago

There's absolutely nothing wrong with having a static website, but there are already tools like pelican, hugo, jekyll, sphinx and stuff that are better suited for it. So while I'm happy for the person's effort and that he got to use Azure, the more glaring thing is I suspect he could be happier using a static site generator. Also Armin Ronacher released a new one late 2015, Lektor. https://www.getlektor.com/ https://www.getlektor.com/ Show me a team replacing their medium-sized django or rails website with ASP.net Core. Or a YCombinator startup huddling up to their screens late at night in Visual Studio pushing code to azure. And them shipping and making customer's happy.

mmargerum 10y ago

Do you really need to stick a an animated gif in the middle of the article? The one thing I would say about JS on the server is writing EJS templates is much faster than something like razor. Otherwise, go trumps node in every other way.