5 ms·

I don't really feel like there is that much more boilerplate with C# than there is with TypeScript (although I do like TypeScripts's ctor shorthand that creates

I don't really feel like there is that much more boilerplate with C# than there is with TypeScript (although I do like TypeScripts's ctor shorthand that creates members for you from ctor params). C# 9 also brings top-level programs, which essentially eliminate all ceremony for the entrypoint[0] - an app can now be as simple as: using System; Console.WriteLine("Hello World!"); [0] https://dotnetcoretutorials.com/2020/08/30/top-level-programs-in-c9/ https://dotnetcoretutorials.com/2020/08/30/top-level-program...

brundolf 6y ago
It depends how you write TypeScript. It's explicitly designed so that you can write it like C# if you want to (classes, interfaces, enums, dependency injection), but you can just as easily compose plain data types and write plain first-class functions and never touch classes.
tester34 6y ago
Aren't top level programs basically "baby mode" for relatively simple programs or web webassembly based examples that target beginners? As far as I've heard it does not exist e.g when it comes for ASP and I believe that what "OP" meant. I may be very wrong here
- GordonS 6y ago
  I haven't used C# 9 yet, but I write a lot of console apps and services/daemons using .NET Core (the world is bigger than web apps :), but I don't see why you can't use top-level programs for ASP.NET Core apps, as they have an entrypoint too. You would of course still have all the usual ASP.NET configuration and DI setup to do though, so the impact would be rather limited.
  - tester34 6y ago
    >as they have an entrypoint too. I meant that (as I've heard) you cannot write big app using "top level style" only/mostly It probably isnt going to reduce "the boiler plate" that people complain about
    - jolux 6y ago
      It will reduce some boilerplate but only for the entry point method
- nathanaldensr 6y ago
  My understanding of this feature is that it's to encourage beginners to write code that does something without first having to learn about namespaces and the entry point concept. I expect most commercial apps and open-source projects will continue to use namespaces and an entry point method in their code.
  - whizzter 6y ago
    Exactly! And on top of that I've mentioned in many conversations how teaching Java and C# as a first language often confuses people into believing that programming is about syntax rather than logic, because they spend so much time searching for syntax errors in their first hello world application. For hello world with 29 tokens if i count correctly for C# vs 4 tokens for a Python program, guess where beginners have an easier time to fail?
  - elboru 6y ago
    It’s also great for testing concepts or libraries, “what happens if I call this object like this or like that?” I used to use LINQPad for that, now I don’t need to, VS Code and this new feature is enough!
- jve 6y ago
  Don't you guys think that entrypoint is only 0.0000...1% of your development time? Not having to write Namespace, class, main method (which comes in template anyway), is not something I would use to compare languages. Its nice for beginners, not having to explain every weird word they see, but not much for professional development. However managing complexity with various language features all over the project makes impact.
  - recursive 6y ago
    If you're working on the same code-base for years, then yes. If you write a few programs per day for throw-away data manipulation or system maintenance or something, then no.
- jpalomaki 6y ago
  Maybe they were thinking about REPL, scripting and Jupyter style notebooks. Having this feature aligns nicely with those use cases.
nurettin 6y ago
.net core web is pretty much a mess. The very sight of dependency injection configuration is cringe. Even having to make the decision to go tables first or code first is a burden. I'm surprised at myself for saying this but given the chance I'd much prefer spring boot.
- tester34 6y ago
  >Even having to make the decision to go tables first or code first is a burden >he very sight of dependency injection configuration is cringe. I'm curious - why?
  - gortok 6y ago
    Coming from a different perspective: Once you've been using Entity Framework for a while (I assume the OP is referring to EF, since there tends to be a 'Use what microsoft ships' culture in the .NET community), is that the APIs available to a "Code First" approach vs. a "Model First" approach are different. If you use Code First and Code Migrations, you don't have access (without getting out of Code First entirely!) to creating Views; and in EF 6 at least, creating indexes was a chore as well. I believe this has been fixed in EF Core; but regardless the mainpoint still stands: The APIs are different and what is natively available is different. At some point doing "Code First", you'll still need to write raw SQL, and that's unexpected if you are planning on doing your work in C# only. Regarding Dependency Injection: It's very much suited towards enterprise web applications; and its failure mode is trying to get DI to work seamlessly in a non-web application sense (C# is a general language; and .NET supports console, GUI, and web applications) and once you get out of the we application thread-per-request pipeline, you find yourself hitting rough patches.
    - Rayan123 6y ago
      Op HSCK 12
    - jolux 6y ago
      I believe the smart advice says don’t go code first if you already know what you’re doing with SQL but it’s definitely sad that there’s such a huge barrier between these modes. As for DI it can definitely be used fruitfully outside of a web application, I suggest the book Dependency Injection: Principles, Practices, and Patterns if you’re curious. It covers examples from ASP.NET Core MVC to console apps to GUI.

brundolf 6y ago

It depends how you write TypeScript. It's explicitly designed so that you can write it like C# if you want to (classes, interfaces, enums, dependency injection), but you can just as easily compose plain data types and write plain first-class functions and never touch classes.

tester34 6y ago

Aren't top level programs basically "baby mode" for relatively simple programs or web webassembly based examples that target beginners? As far as I've heard it does not exist e.g when it comes for ASP and I believe that what "OP" meant. I may be very wrong here

GordonS 6y ago
I haven't used C# 9 yet, but I write a lot of console apps and services/daemons using .NET Core (the world is bigger than web apps :), but I don't see why you can't use top-level programs for ASP.NET Core apps, as they have an entrypoint too. You would of course still have all the usual ASP.NET configuration and DI setup to do though, so the impact would be rather limited.
- tester34 6y ago
  >as they have an entrypoint too. I meant that (as I've heard) you cannot write big app using "top level style" only/mostly It probably isnt going to reduce "the boiler plate" that people complain about
  - jolux 6y ago
    It will reduce some boilerplate but only for the entry point method
nathanaldensr 6y ago
My understanding of this feature is that it's to encourage beginners to write code that does something without first having to learn about namespaces and the entry point concept. I expect most commercial apps and open-source projects will continue to use namespaces and an entry point method in their code.
- whizzter 6y ago
  Exactly! And on top of that I've mentioned in many conversations how teaching Java and C# as a first language often confuses people into believing that programming is about syntax rather than logic, because they spend so much time searching for syntax errors in their first hello world application. For hello world with 29 tokens if i count correctly for C# vs 4 tokens for a Python program, guess where beginners have an easier time to fail?
- elboru 6y ago
  It’s also great for testing concepts or libraries, “what happens if I call this object like this or like that?” I used to use LINQPad for that, now I don’t need to, VS Code and this new feature is enough!
jve 6y ago
Don't you guys think that entrypoint is only 0.0000...1% of your development time? Not having to write Namespace, class, main method (which comes in template anyway), is not something I would use to compare languages. Its nice for beginners, not having to explain every weird word they see, but not much for professional development. However managing complexity with various language features all over the project makes impact.
- recursive 6y ago
  If you're working on the same code-base for years, then yes. If you write a few programs per day for throw-away data manipulation or system maintenance or something, then no.
jpalomaki 6y ago
Maybe they were thinking about REPL, scripting and Jupyter style notebooks. Having this feature aligns nicely with those use cases.

nurettin 6y ago

.net core web is pretty much a mess. The very sight of dependency injection configuration is cringe. Even having to make the decision to go tables first or code first is a burden. I'm surprised at myself for saying this but given the chance I'd much prefer spring boot.

tester34 6y ago
>Even having to make the decision to go tables first or code first is a burden >he very sight of dependency injection configuration is cringe. I'm curious - why?
- gortok 6y ago
  Coming from a different perspective: Once you've been using Entity Framework for a while (I assume the OP is referring to EF, since there tends to be a 'Use what microsoft ships' culture in the .NET community), is that the APIs available to a "Code First" approach vs. a "Model First" approach are different. If you use Code First and Code Migrations, you don't have access (without getting out of Code First entirely!) to creating Views; and in EF 6 at least, creating indexes was a chore as well. I believe this has been fixed in EF Core; but regardless the mainpoint still stands: The APIs are different and what is natively available is different. At some point doing "Code First", you'll still need to write raw SQL, and that's unexpected if you are planning on doing your work in C# only. Regarding Dependency Injection: It's very much suited towards enterprise web applications; and its failure mode is trying to get DI to work seamlessly in a non-web application sense (C# is a general language; and .NET supports console, GUI, and web applications) and once you get out of the we application thread-per-request pipeline, you find yourself hitting rough patches.
  - Rayan123 6y ago
    Op HSCK 12
  - jolux 6y ago
    I believe the smart advice says don’t go code first if you already know what you’re doing with SQL but it’s definitely sad that there’s such a huge barrier between these modes. As for DI it can definitely be used fruitfully outside of a web application, I suggest the book Dependency Injection: Principles, Practices, and Patterns if you’re curious. It covers examples from ASP.NET Core MVC to console apps to GUI.