4 ms·

The necessity for clarification in this matter is part of the problem.

by Traubenfuchs 9y ago

UK-AL 9y ago
I don't know why it is required. I mean its basically a Django/Python or Rails/Ruby style relationship.
- jbergens 9y ago
  It could be a bit more explicit on the nuget page.
  - GordonS 9y ago
    It says 'Microsoft.AspNetCore' in a large font near the top of the page, seems pretty clear to me?
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
GordonS 9y ago
I guess this was meant to be a gripe about .NET Core vs .NET Standard - but this release isn't about either, it's ASP.NET Core, the web framework. There is no clarification needed in this case.
nolok 9y ago
There is a specification, an implementation, and then a webapp framework to develop on it, similar to most languages out there. Python specs/CPython/Django Ruby specs/JRuby/Ruby on Rails PHP specs/HHVM/Symfony Java specs/Java Virtual Machine/Java Server Pages .Net Standard/.Net Core/ASP.Net Core
- tonyedgecombe 9y ago
  .Net standard isn't really the same as Ruby or Python specs, not that it isn't welcome but you can't just brush the complexity under the carpet like that. Also, you have the version number confusion, for example .Net Core 2.0 vs .Net 2.0, one was released 12 years ago, the other in a month. It's all as clear as mud.
  - nolok 9y ago
    > .Net standard isn't really the same as Ruby or Python specs, not that it isn't welcome but you can't just brush the complexity under the carpet like that. That's exactly what it is, actually. It has several versions, so does a lot of language like Java or C++. If it has more complexity than that, I would welcome you to give concrete exemple of what it contains that isn't in other language's specs. > Also, you have the version number confusion, for example .Net Core 2.0 vs .Net 2.0, one was released 12 years ago, the other in a month. It's all as clear as mud. While I agree it may not be clear on the first look, anyone investing more than 2 minutes in .Net understands the difference and is never confused again. ".Net" (this name alone) is the legacy name of what is now called the ".Net Framework", the original and still current implementation of the plateform aimed to run on windows only; what you refer to ".Net 2.0" is ".Net Framework 2.0", and is now always referenced by that name. ".Net Core" is another implementation, one that is aimed at being portable and running on other OSes too. The table on .Net Standard page makes this very clear, you can see the revisions of the standard on the X axis, and all the implementation on the Y axis, .Net Framework and .Net Core being two different implementation: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/standard/net-standard https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/standard/net-standar... For reference, here is the very same kind of grid for another language (here C++): http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/compiler_support http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/compiler_support Again, I am not saying the name are very well chosen or super clear to someone who glances at it once every 5 years, but anyone actually interested in .Net needs about 3 minutes to clear that up and never have to ask any question about that again.
    - ryandvm 9y ago
      Unfortunately, glancing at .NET once every 5 years is what about 90% of the devs around here do (including me). Hence the perennial "WTF is up with the name/version?" sub-thread...
      - Boothroid 9y ago
        .NET is what I know best, but few on here seem to use it/like it. I'm keen to beef up my dev skills. Is .NET worth sticking with?

The necessity for clarification in this matter is part of the problem.

UK-AL 9y ago

I don't know why it is required. I mean its basically a Django/Python or Rails/Ruby style relationship.

jbergens 9y ago
It could be a bit more explicit on the nuget page.
- GordonS 9y ago
  It says 'Microsoft.AspNetCore' in a large font near the top of the page, seems pretty clear to me?
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

GordonS 9y ago

I guess this was meant to be a gripe about .NET Core vs .NET Standard - but this release isn't about either, it's ASP.NET Core, the web framework. There is no clarification needed in this case.

nolok 9y ago

There is a specification, an implementation, and then a webapp framework to develop on it, similar to most languages out there. Python specs/CPython/Django Ruby specs/JRuby/Ruby on Rails PHP specs/HHVM/Symfony Java specs/Java Virtual Machine/Java Server Pages .Net Standard/.Net Core/ASP.Net Core

tonyedgecombe 9y ago
.Net standard isn't really the same as Ruby or Python specs, not that it isn't welcome but you can't just brush the complexity under the carpet like that. Also, you have the version number confusion, for example .Net Core 2.0 vs .Net 2.0, one was released 12 years ago, the other in a month. It's all as clear as mud.
- nolok 9y ago
  > .Net standard isn't really the same as Ruby or Python specs, not that it isn't welcome but you can't just brush the complexity under the carpet like that. That's exactly what it is, actually. It has several versions, so does a lot of language like Java or C++. If it has more complexity than that, I would welcome you to give concrete exemple of what it contains that isn't in other language's specs. > Also, you have the version number confusion, for example .Net Core 2.0 vs .Net 2.0, one was released 12 years ago, the other in a month. It's all as clear as mud. While I agree it may not be clear on the first look, anyone investing more than 2 minutes in .Net understands the difference and is never confused again. ".Net" (this name alone) is the legacy name of what is now called the ".Net Framework", the original and still current implementation of the plateform aimed to run on windows only; what you refer to ".Net 2.0" is ".Net Framework 2.0", and is now always referenced by that name. ".Net Core" is another implementation, one that is aimed at being portable and running on other OSes too. The table on .Net Standard page makes this very clear, you can see the revisions of the standard on the X axis, and all the implementation on the Y axis, .Net Framework and .Net Core being two different implementation: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/standard/net-standard https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/standard/net-standar... For reference, here is the very same kind of grid for another language (here C++): http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/compiler_support http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/compiler_support Again, I am not saying the name are very well chosen or super clear to someone who glances at it once every 5 years, but anyone actually interested in .Net needs about 3 minutes to clear that up and never have to ask any question about that again.
  - ryandvm 9y ago
    Unfortunately, glancing at .NET once every 5 years is what about 90% of the devs around here do (including me). Hence the perennial "WTF is up with the name/version?" sub-thread...
    - Boothroid 9y ago
      .NET is what I know best, but few on here seem to use it/like it. I'm keen to beef up my dev skills. Is .NET worth sticking with?