5 ms·

This is the confusing part for me, yes. Javascript is fine and well, but C# seems the better choice in general here.

by JCSato 8y ago

shawnz 8y ago
What makes it the better choice in this situation? C# can't run in browsers whereas Office 365 can.
- recursive 8y ago
  Well, blazor exists now, so that's not totally true.
  - TensorMetric 8y ago
    They are actually using Typescript, and this will lead to less friction wrt hiring devs, supporting all those platforms and integrating web components. Still I would have hoped that MS would be a little more forward thinking, and put some of their MSR tech in good use, to encourage the use of better languages. Just like how Facebook is pushing ReasonML. I think that the C# focus of .NET is a major mistake holding the platform back, especially when we have languages like F#, Scala, Swift, ReasonML and Rust these days.
    - dep_b 8y ago
      How do you know they're doing that? Not that it doesn't make total sense to use TypeScript from any angle I can imagine. > I think that the C# focus of .NET is a major mistake holding the platform back, especially when we have languages like F#, Scala, Swift, ReasonML and Rust these days. Yeah F# is really nice, but the IDE support is kinda meh. Also .Net expects you to embrace nil at a lot of points which doesn't gel so nice with F#. But Swift has a worse problem with Objective-C-isms but being a first class citizen really helps as they make a lot of API's really better to use with Swift.
- zip1234 8y ago
  You mean JavaScript not Office 365 right? They are working on compiling C# to Web Assembly FYI.
  - bpicolo 8y ago
    IE11 will never support wasm, so I suspect wasm isn't their first choice eh
    - irrational 8y ago
      This is a good point. MS has agreed to support IE11 until 2025. I'm not sure if that means they have an internal mandate that Office 365 must work with IE11, but I wouldn't be surprised. Those poor poor MS developers.
      - bpicolo 8y ago
        I wouldn't call them "poor" in this case. WASM is super cool and has a hopeful future, but productionizing wasm apps is currently still quite difficult in practice - it's still missing a lot of relevant tooling (debugging is hard)
irrational 8y ago
I wonder if it has anything to do with their being more JS developers than C# developers. Though, I imagine the average C# developer is a better programmer than the average JS programmer, but since quality is often a function of quantity, maybe there are going the later route. Or maybe it's something entirely different ;-)
- Gibbon1 8y ago
  > to do with their being more JS developers than C# developers. My boss told me there was no future banging out C on small embedded processors. 25 years later there is always work because there are so few people who can still do it. When 80% of programmers can't do anything other than JavaScript they'll be more than plenty of work for the other 20%

This is the confusing part for me, yes. Javascript is fine and well, but C# seems the better choice in general here.

by JCSato 8y ago

This is the confusing part for me, yes. Javascript is fine and well, but C# seems the better choice in general here.

shawnz 8y ago

What makes it the better choice in this situation? C# can't run in browsers whereas Office 365 can.

recursive 8y ago
Well, blazor exists now, so that's not totally true.
- TensorMetric 8y ago
  They are actually using Typescript, and this will lead to less friction wrt hiring devs, supporting all those platforms and integrating web components. Still I would have hoped that MS would be a little more forward thinking, and put some of their MSR tech in good use, to encourage the use of better languages. Just like how Facebook is pushing ReasonML. I think that the C# focus of .NET is a major mistake holding the platform back, especially when we have languages like F#, Scala, Swift, ReasonML and Rust these days.
  - dep_b 8y ago
    How do you know they're doing that? Not that it doesn't make total sense to use TypeScript from any angle I can imagine. > I think that the C# focus of .NET is a major mistake holding the platform back, especially when we have languages like F#, Scala, Swift, ReasonML and Rust these days. Yeah F# is really nice, but the IDE support is kinda meh. Also .Net expects you to embrace nil at a lot of points which doesn't gel so nice with F#. But Swift has a worse problem with Objective-C-isms but being a first class citizen really helps as they make a lot of API's really better to use with Swift.
zip1234 8y ago
You mean JavaScript not Office 365 right? They are working on compiling C# to Web Assembly FYI.
- bpicolo 8y ago
  IE11 will never support wasm, so I suspect wasm isn't their first choice eh
  - irrational 8y ago
    This is a good point. MS has agreed to support IE11 until 2025. I'm not sure if that means they have an internal mandate that Office 365 must work with IE11, but I wouldn't be surprised. Those poor poor MS developers.
    - bpicolo 8y ago
      I wouldn't call them "poor" in this case. WASM is super cool and has a hopeful future, but productionizing wasm apps is currently still quite difficult in practice - it's still missing a lot of relevant tooling (debugging is hard)

irrational 8y ago

I wonder if it has anything to do with their being more JS developers than C# developers. Though, I imagine the average C# developer is a better programmer than the average JS programmer, but since quality is often a function of quantity, maybe there are going the later route. Or maybe it's something entirely different ;-)

Gibbon1 8y ago
> to do with their being more JS developers than C# developers. My boss told me there was no future banging out C on small embedded processors. 25 years later there is always work because there are so few people who can still do it. When 80% of programmers can't do anything other than JavaScript they'll be more than plenty of work for the other 20%