5 ms·

Agreed, and after a shakey start .NET Core is really delivering. It's trivial now to use any CI to build docker images of .NET core apps and deploy like any oth

Agreed, and after a shakey start .NET Core is really delivering. It's trivial now to use any CI to build docker images of .NET core apps and deploy like any other docker container. Performance is great and I'm a huge fan of the big stdlib, which means less fragmentation and churn relying on packages for quite basic behaviour. The only thing I'm not entirely sure about is the recent direction of C# to add loads and loads of syntactic sugar, which reduces the amount of code you have to write but I find the code becomes so terse it's hard to glance and reason with, but that may be just because it's quite new.

politelemon 6y ago
I'm with you on the terseness. I've been finding myself asking people to be "clear, not clever" with usage of some of the sugar, whereas previously adopting new syntax hasn't been so much of a challenge. It's definitely a balancing act between being easy to read and causing the reader to have to context switch while reading. Most of the sugar in C# hits all the right spots though. I have no doubt that some of this newer syntax is clever, and very welcome to many, but not everyone will realize that it's far more beneficial in the long term to cater to the common denominator.
- moomin 6y ago
  I think everyone just has to accept that if (expression is {} val) Is the right way to code, even if it looks ugly.
merb 6y ago
> C# to add loads and loads of syntactic sugar well some is necessary. example: init-only-Setter, was impossible to do before. You could not write the same Code, without it. No matter what you did. using declarations where also necessary to increase readability. and nullable reference types also were important!
- jayd16 6y ago
  You could use an explicit private readonly field and a property getter, or even just a public readonly field. I would argue its only sugar.
  - ygra 6y ago
    It doesn't scale that well, as you need ctor parameters for every property, so API additions may also be breaking changes.
  - 9wzYQbTYsAIc 6y ago
    Are you referring to the init only setters? If so, it isn’t just sugar, they added a new hook for it in the internals, rather than just relabelling a technique to accomplish a similar (but not equal) end.
  - merb 6y ago
    well that would be different to instantiate tough. it would be Class(1, 2, 3) instead of Class { Value1=1, Value2=2, Value3=3, } actually record types are more syntactic sugar around what you said than initonly, which opens up a new way of writing code
hackerfromthefu 6y ago
Yes the big stdlib is the secret sauce. c# is great but the framework offers so much. Imagine taking a non trivial 5 year old javascript project and upgrading it .. but with .NET that is well written to use the framework features it's often quite achievable. I've upgraded a number recently and mostly it's been quick and successful. Because of the sensible stdlib!
- 9wzYQbTYsAIc 6y ago
  I’m excited about Blazor and compiling dotnet to WebAssembly. There are some newer Blazor libraries built with the goal of having {no|minimal} JavaScript being written by application and web developers. Of course, there’s lots of room to grow towards that goal.
moron4hire 6y ago
To the contrary, I think it makes the code easier to understand. The syntactic sugar that gets added to C# is almost universally driven through studying extant usage and codifying common patterns. Instead of jumping through flaming hoops of boilerplate code to make, say, asynchronous network requests work, there is now a specific syntax for sequencing asynchronous calls that keeps related code more closely related in the source. Specific syntax for patterns makes intention more clear, and shifts responsibility for getting it right from the developer to the compiler.
deskamess 6y ago
Do you have any pointers on a gentle introduction to docker and kubernetes in the .net world? Most of the docs seem to be tuned to Linux ecosystems... which makes sense given the heritage.
- moomin 6y ago
  I’d recommend embracing it: the Microsoft Linux .NET containers are solid. It’s not that hard writing .NET code on Windows and deploying to Linux containers.
  - exhilaration 6y ago
    I work for a large Unnamed Parcel Service, we've got a ton of legacy applications on pretty much every platform you could name from the last 50 years. But all our new application are .Net Core in Linux containers running on Azure Kubernetes Service.
- martinald 6y ago
  I'm really only using it on Linux. VS and VSCode (with the Docker and .NET plugins) can generate docker files with one click/command for .NET projects, which also use the right dlls from your project as entrypoints, etc. From that it's just standard Docker - it doesn't matter that you are running .NET core in it really. You can do anything you could normally in Docker and K8S.
9wzYQbTYsAIc 6y ago
A great deal of the “loads and loads of syntactic sugar” serves the purposes of making C# more functional-friendly. You might explore the new features from that paradigm, to help you reason about it.

politelemon 6y ago

I'm with you on the terseness. I've been finding myself asking people to be "clear, not clever" with usage of some of the sugar, whereas previously adopting new syntax hasn't been so much of a challenge. It's definitely a balancing act between being easy to read and causing the reader to have to context switch while reading. Most of the sugar in C# hits all the right spots though. I have no doubt that some of this newer syntax is clever, and very welcome to many, but not everyone will realize that it's far more beneficial in the long term to cater to the common denominator.

moomin 6y ago
I think everyone just has to accept that if (expression is {} val) Is the right way to code, even if it looks ugly.

merb 6y ago

> C# to add loads and loads of syntactic sugar well some is necessary. example: init-only-Setter, was impossible to do before. You could not write the same Code, without it. No matter what you did. using declarations where also necessary to increase readability. and nullable reference types also were important!

jayd16 6y ago
You could use an explicit private readonly field and a property getter, or even just a public readonly field. I would argue its only sugar.
- ygra 6y ago
  It doesn't scale that well, as you need ctor parameters for every property, so API additions may also be breaking changes.
- 9wzYQbTYsAIc 6y ago
  Are you referring to the init only setters? If so, it isn’t just sugar, they added a new hook for it in the internals, rather than just relabelling a technique to accomplish a similar (but not equal) end.
- merb 6y ago
  well that would be different to instantiate tough. it would be Class(1, 2, 3) instead of Class { Value1=1, Value2=2, Value3=3, } actually record types are more syntactic sugar around what you said than initonly, which opens up a new way of writing code

hackerfromthefu 6y ago

Yes the big stdlib is the secret sauce. c# is great but the framework offers so much. Imagine taking a non trivial 5 year old javascript project and upgrading it .. but with .NET that is well written to use the framework features it's often quite achievable. I've upgraded a number recently and mostly it's been quick and successful. Because of the sensible stdlib!

9wzYQbTYsAIc 6y ago
I’m excited about Blazor and compiling dotnet to WebAssembly. There are some newer Blazor libraries built with the goal of having {no|minimal} JavaScript being written by application and web developers. Of course, there’s lots of room to grow towards that goal.

moron4hire 6y ago

To the contrary, I think it makes the code easier to understand. The syntactic sugar that gets added to C# is almost universally driven through studying extant usage and codifying common patterns. Instead of jumping through flaming hoops of boilerplate code to make, say, asynchronous network requests work, there is now a specific syntax for sequencing asynchronous calls that keeps related code more closely related in the source. Specific syntax for patterns makes intention more clear, and shifts responsibility for getting it right from the developer to the compiler.

deskamess 6y ago

Do you have any pointers on a gentle introduction to docker and kubernetes in the .net world? Most of the docs seem to be tuned to Linux ecosystems... which makes sense given the heritage.

moomin 6y ago
I’d recommend embracing it: the Microsoft Linux .NET containers are solid. It’s not that hard writing .NET code on Windows and deploying to Linux containers.
- exhilaration 6y ago
  I work for a large Unnamed Parcel Service, we've got a ton of legacy applications on pretty much every platform you could name from the last 50 years. But all our new application are .Net Core in Linux containers running on Azure Kubernetes Service.
martinald 6y ago
I'm really only using it on Linux. VS and VSCode (with the Docker and .NET plugins) can generate docker files with one click/command for .NET projects, which also use the right dlls from your project as entrypoints, etc. From that it's just standard Docker - it doesn't matter that you are running .NET core in it really. You can do anything you could normally in Docker and K8S.

9wzYQbTYsAIc 6y ago

A great deal of the “loads and loads of syntactic sugar” serves the purposes of making C# more functional-friendly. You might explore the new features from that paradigm, to help you reason about it.