8 ms·

Book of the Runtime – Internals of the .Net Runtime not in the documentation

151 points by benaadams 9y ago

ishtu 9y ago
Slightly off-topic: I advise all fellow hackers ignore MS-authored opensource due to attitude like like that: https://github.com/dotnet/cli/issues/3093 https://github.com/dotnet/cli/issues/3093 https://github.com/dotnet/cli/issues/6086 https://github.com/dotnet/cli/issues/6086
- hudo 9y ago
  1. collecting usage data (which doesn't contain ANY personal info!!) will make .net core better. 2. you can opt-out easily. I fully support things like this, every company out there is using some kind of feedback mechanism to get insight how are customer using their products.
  - dahauns 9y ago
    I agree with 1. and am not averse to it in principle, but in this kind of scenario, opt-out is simply a bad idea. The security and privacy implications in many scenarios are just too big. And assurances that no personal data will be collected are worthless, we need guarantees, often even mandated by company policies, regulations or contractual obligations. The hoopla with command line arguments should be enough to underline the fundamental problem with that approach.
    - josteink 9y ago
      > And assurances that no personal data will be collected are worthless How so? It’s open source. You can verify it yourself. Here's a question for you to consider: .NET Core runs very well on Linux. Linux is a first-class platform and issues which only affects Linux is as a general rule considered a deal-breaker when making a release. Do you think Microsoft would put such a focus on ensuring good Linux-compatibility if their telemetry suggested nobody ran .NET Core on Linux? I don't know for sure, but I'm inclined to believe that this telemetry has been among the things ensuring Linux today is a first-class supported platform, because Microsoft is seeing that .NET Core is now gaining traction in a space where Microsoft traditionally has has very little.
      - dahauns 9y ago
        > The hoopla with command line arguments should be enough to underline the fundamental problem with that approach. It's worthless in that assurances don't mean a thing, even if they are given with best intentions and to the best of their knowledge. In this case I could easily verify that their assurance was wrong (they even admitted in the github discussion that transmitting command line arguments violates their own privacy policy), but the deed would have been done. And for the rest: as I said, I'm all for telemetry. If it's clearly communicated and opt-in. Other tools do it (as mentioned in github, e.g. yeoman) and live well with it.
        deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]
        deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]
  - IncRnd 9y ago
    > I fully support things like this, By "this" do you mean opt-out or telemetry? The issue that many people have is the opt-out portion.
    - hudo 9y ago
      They want CLI arg to out out, and not environment variable. I personally don't have problems with ENV vars, so don't understand their problems.
      - IncRnd 9y ago
        It isn't just about CLI vs Env Vars vs Registry. You are mistaking opt-out for opt-in.
- romanovcode 9y ago
  `set DOTNET_CLI_TELEMETRY_OPTOUT=true`
- oblio 9y ago
  I'm not a big fan, but this seems a reasonable approach, in my opinion: https://github.com/dotnet/cli/pull/3485/files#diff-6efe7cfc66208fdb981618da4faf1635R36 https://github.com/dotnet/cli/pull/3485/files#diff-6efe7cfc6...
- sctb 9y ago
  Generic inflammatory tangents are more than just slightly off topic. Please don't post like this. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
cm2187 9y ago
That should be an interesting read. Going through the introduction, there is a whole part highlighting that the success of .net comes from its simplicity (which I strongly agree with). Then I think about the massive compatibility matrix between the different versions of the different sub-fameworks, the confusing core vs non-core naming and versioning conventions, the new language syntax features that are available through nuget packages only, etc. I can't help thinking that the .net team has lost its way, and needs to have a hard think about how to keep all of that simple. Keeping it simple is what has made the success of competing languages like python.
- snaky 9y ago
  The 'NET Core' movement feels like they got that feeling too.
- chi18 9y ago
  Whether they've lost their way or not, from what I hear it runs a lot faster on Linux, which is great, because that's what I'd rather be running on server-side.
- oblio 9y ago
  > the new language syntax features that are available through nuget packages only, etc. Which features?
  - cm2187 9y ago
    Value tuples. If you want to use them you need to add a nuget package to the solution. I am not saying it's not doable, but it's a bad UX. Think of the experience of a newcomer to the language.
    - SimonPStevens 9y ago
      I could be wrong, but I was under the impression that this was temporary. The new tuple syntax in C#7 required the addition lf the ValueTuple class in the framework, but as framework and compiler versions are released independently it has to go into one first. This means people can upgrade their compiler to C#7, and install the ValueTuple nuget package and get the benefit of the new langauge feature without having to move their entire project to require the latest version of the .net framework. I believe the next version of the framework will include ValueTuple by default and the package will no longer be required.
apardoe-MSFT 9y ago
Having worked for 7 years on the .NET runtime team, I can attest that the BOTR is the official reference. It was created as documentation for the engineering team, by the engineering team. And it was (supposed to be) kept up to date any time a new feature was added or changed.

151 points by benaadams 9y ago

Slightly off-topic: I advise all fellow hackers ignore MS-authored opensource due to attitude like like that: https://github.com/dotnet/cli/issues/3093 https://github.com/dotnet/cli/issues/3093 https://github.com/dotnet/cli/issues/6086 https://github.com/dotnet/cli/issues/6086

hudo 9y ago
1. collecting usage data (which doesn't contain ANY personal info!!) will make .net core better. 2. you can opt-out easily. I fully support things like this, every company out there is using some kind of feedback mechanism to get insight how are customer using their products.
- dahauns 9y ago
  I agree with 1. and am not averse to it in principle, but in this kind of scenario, opt-out is simply a bad idea. The security and privacy implications in many scenarios are just too big. And assurances that no personal data will be collected are worthless, we need guarantees, often even mandated by company policies, regulations or contractual obligations. The hoopla with command line arguments should be enough to underline the fundamental problem with that approach.
  - josteink 9y ago
    > And assurances that no personal data will be collected are worthless How so? It’s open source. You can verify it yourself. Here's a question for you to consider: .NET Core runs very well on Linux. Linux is a first-class platform and issues which only affects Linux is as a general rule considered a deal-breaker when making a release. Do you think Microsoft would put such a focus on ensuring good Linux-compatibility if their telemetry suggested nobody ran .NET Core on Linux? I don't know for sure, but I'm inclined to believe that this telemetry has been among the things ensuring Linux today is a first-class supported platform, because Microsoft is seeing that .NET Core is now gaining traction in a space where Microsoft traditionally has has very little.
    - dahauns 9y ago
      > The hoopla with command line arguments should be enough to underline the fundamental problem with that approach. It's worthless in that assurances don't mean a thing, even if they are given with best intentions and to the best of their knowledge. In this case I could easily verify that their assurance was wrong (they even admitted in the github discussion that transmitting command line arguments violates their own privacy policy), but the deed would have been done. And for the rest: as I said, I'm all for telemetry. If it's clearly communicated and opt-in. Other tools do it (as mentioned in github, e.g. yeoman) and live well with it.
      - deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]
      - deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]
- IncRnd 9y ago
  > I fully support things like this, By "this" do you mean opt-out or telemetry? The issue that many people have is the opt-out portion.
  - hudo 9y ago
    They want CLI arg to out out, and not environment variable. I personally don't have problems with ENV vars, so don't understand their problems.
    - IncRnd 9y ago
      It isn't just about CLI vs Env Vars vs Registry. You are mistaking opt-out for opt-in.
romanovcode 9y ago
`set DOTNET_CLI_TELEMETRY_OPTOUT=true`
oblio 9y ago
I'm not a big fan, but this seems a reasonable approach, in my opinion: https://github.com/dotnet/cli/pull/3485/files#diff-6efe7cfc66208fdb981618da4faf1635R36 https://github.com/dotnet/cli/pull/3485/files#diff-6efe7cfc6...
sctb 9y ago
Generic inflammatory tangents are more than just slightly off topic. Please don't post like this. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

cm2187 9y ago

That should be an interesting read. Going through the introduction, there is a whole part highlighting that the success of .net comes from its simplicity (which I strongly agree with). Then I think about the massive compatibility matrix between the different versions of the different sub-fameworks, the confusing core vs non-core naming and versioning conventions, the new language syntax features that are available through nuget packages only, etc. I can't help thinking that the .net team has lost its way, and needs to have a hard think about how to keep all of that simple. Keeping it simple is what has made the success of competing languages like python.

snaky 9y ago
The 'NET Core' movement feels like they got that feeling too.
chi18 9y ago
Whether they've lost their way or not, from what I hear it runs a lot faster on Linux, which is great, because that's what I'd rather be running on server-side.
oblio 9y ago
> the new language syntax features that are available through nuget packages only, etc. Which features?
- cm2187 9y ago
  Value tuples. If you want to use them you need to add a nuget package to the solution. I am not saying it's not doable, but it's a bad UX. Think of the experience of a newcomer to the language.
  - SimonPStevens 9y ago
    I could be wrong, but I was under the impression that this was temporary. The new tuple syntax in C#7 required the addition lf the ValueTuple class in the framework, but as framework and compiler versions are released independently it has to go into one first. This means people can upgrade their compiler to C#7, and install the ValueTuple nuget package and get the benefit of the new langauge feature without having to move their entire project to require the latest version of the .net framework. I believe the next version of the framework will include ValueTuple by default and the package will no longer be required.

apardoe-MSFT 9y ago

Having worked for 7 years on the .NET runtime team, I can attest that the BOTR is the official reference. It was created as documentation for the engineering team, by the engineering team. And it was (supposed to be) kept up to date any time a new feature was added or changed.