4 ms·
> .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. Th
by 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 agoUnfortunately, 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?
- JamesBarney 9y agoDepends what you want to do. If you wanna work for start ups, or amagoobooksoft(with the exception of Microsoft) it's not a great choice. If you want a good high paying career outside of Seattle/SV then it's a great choice.
- Boothroid 9y agoI'm in the UK so smaller pool unfortunately. And salaries certainly aren't as good as the US! Seems to be a fair amount of C# in city of London/finance etc and fair contracting rates there though.
- pjmlp 9y agoI also like it a lot, since the alpha version made available to selected MCPs. In what concerns enterprise world, Java and .NET are here to stay. If you have any doubts regarding .NET, just check BUILD 2017 talks and all Microsoft blogs regarding UWP, .NET is used everywhere, even if the lower level layers are a mix of C and C++. Even the Windows UI blog is using only C# for all cool UI effects being introduced with Fluent Design.
- s_kilk 9y agoIt really depends on the market. I got out of .Net/MS stuff because that kind of work was bottom-of-the-barrel compared to what I could get by re-investing in my Linux/OSS skills. In some other places .Net has all the best paying jobs.
- Boothroid 9y agoThere doesn't seem to be that much Linux here in the UK but perhaps I'm just not looking in the right places.
- danbruc 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. .NET Standard does neither specify a programming language, there is for example the C# specification for that, nor the runtime environment, where there is the Common Language Infrastructure (CLI) specification with specifications for the Common Type System (CTS), Virtual Execution System (VES), Common Intermediate Language (CIL), and a few other things like meta data formats. The CLI specification also contains a specification for basic class libraries, among them the Base Class Library (BCL). I am not really sure about the exact way .NET Standard and the class library specifications in the CLI specification interact, but .NET Standard essentially defines sets of APIs that must be available in the class library of a conforming implementations.