4 ms·

You say that as if they are somehow being sparing in their support of C# and .NET, which is clearly not true. What specifically do you see as lacking on that f

by bhauer 7y ago

You say that as if they are somehow being sparing in their support of C# and .NET, which is clearly not true. What specifically do you see as lacking on that front?

cm2187 7y ago
I can't remember the last time they contributed anything significant to the .net standard library. Yes, they added a json serializer. In 2019, was about time. They ported some of those library to .net standard (but only some, even with .net standard 3 there are lots of small refactorings that are required to make my libraries run). They are adding to the language, which is a mixed blessing, it is helping in some aspects, but also making the syntax even more complicated to a beginer. But the standard libraries are rather stale and would deserve a lot more love.
- resoluteteeth 7y ago
  It's possible there will be more after .net 5 is released, but I think the current trend is to keep languages' standard libraries small, anyway, though. If you look at languages like python, the standard library is incredibly crufty, so it might be better if .net just deprecates stuff and people use other packages.
polskibus 7y ago
The speed of development, the scope and quality of new language features has dropped significantly ever since Hejlsberg left C#. C# with .Net should compete with Go and rust these days, fight for the mindshare of developers.
- deburo 7y ago
  I don't understand your concern. I think Mads Torgersen & co. are doing a wonderful job. We've had a new version of C# with each new (recent at least) release of Visual Studio. Did you have issues with the quality of new features? I'm really puzzled by your comment.
  - polskibus 7y ago
    What I meant is that most of the recent C# additions are merely syntactic sugar that does not increase developer productivity in a significant way, does not boost the expressiveness of the language, sometimes even decreases the readability of the code. That's in contrast to things like generics and li q. Besides apart from C# there's also CLR and Jit that could use more love. It is well known that jvm is a better vm than CLR. Most of the CLR speed comes from using references to value types but somewhat as an afterthought and without tools that C++ provides (readonly gives you muh less power that const reference).
    - ksec 7y ago
      This is somewhat a strange take. Apart from Borrow Checker which is a recent invention, all programming languages features, as far as I am concern has been done previously in one way or another. There is only so many language features you can fit in on a languages like C# which is soon to be 20 years old. It is a sign of maturity. And C# in itself is already very modern compared to Java. Most of the JVM performance improvement came from many Enterprise customers absolutely pushing the limit to a point where performance of JVM today would be unthinkable 10 - 20 years ago. It is the work a hundreds of millions if not billions over the past two decade. And it is not like Microsoft are not doing research on how to speed it up.

by bhauer 7y ago

You say that as if they are somehow being sparing in their support of C# and .NET, which is clearly not true. What specifically do you see as lacking on that front?

cm2187 7y ago

I can't remember the last time they contributed anything significant to the .net standard library. Yes, they added a json serializer. In 2019, was about time. They ported some of those library to .net standard (but only some, even with .net standard 3 there are lots of small refactorings that are required to make my libraries run). They are adding to the language, which is a mixed blessing, it is helping in some aspects, but also making the syntax even more complicated to a beginer. But the standard libraries are rather stale and would deserve a lot more love.

resoluteteeth 7y ago
It's possible there will be more after .net 5 is released, but I think the current trend is to keep languages' standard libraries small, anyway, though. If you look at languages like python, the standard library is incredibly crufty, so it might be better if .net just deprecates stuff and people use other packages.

polskibus 7y ago

The speed of development, the scope and quality of new language features has dropped significantly ever since Hejlsberg left C#. C# with .Net should compete with Go and rust these days, fight for the mindshare of developers.

deburo 7y ago
I don't understand your concern. I think Mads Torgersen & co. are doing a wonderful job. We've had a new version of C# with each new (recent at least) release of Visual Studio. Did you have issues with the quality of new features? I'm really puzzled by your comment.
- polskibus 7y ago
  What I meant is that most of the recent C# additions are merely syntactic sugar that does not increase developer productivity in a significant way, does not boost the expressiveness of the language, sometimes even decreases the readability of the code. That's in contrast to things like generics and li q. Besides apart from C# there's also CLR and Jit that could use more love. It is well known that jvm is a better vm than CLR. Most of the CLR speed comes from using references to value types but somewhat as an afterthought and without tools that C++ provides (readonly gives you muh less power that const reference).
  - ksec 7y ago
    This is somewhat a strange take. Apart from Borrow Checker which is a recent invention, all programming languages features, as far as I am concern has been done previously in one way or another. There is only so many language features you can fit in on a languages like C# which is soon to be 20 years old. It is a sign of maturity. And C# in itself is already very modern compared to Java. Most of the JVM performance improvement came from many Enterprise customers absolutely pushing the limit to a point where performance of JVM today would be unthinkable 10 - 20 years ago. It is the work a hundreds of millions if not billions over the past two decade. And it is not like Microsoft are not doing research on how to speed it up.