5 ms·

I love when I read about languages and they completely ignore .NET and C#. Like it hasn't advanced in leaps and bounds.

by DonnyV 6y ago

pjmlp 6y ago
And everything that has existed outside Bell Labs and UNIX.
ibraheemdev 6y ago
.NET will always be looked at as enterprisey, and old school. I agree that it has advanced a lot, but I don't think anything will change that perspective.
- MereInterest 6y ago
  And Windows-only. I know that Mono has made some good strides, but relying on it for the language itself adds a much bigger risk factor.
  - DonnyV 6y ago
    This is exactly the mindset of a lot of developers that don't even bother looking at .NET. If you did. You would know that .NET is far beyond offering Mono. .NET and Mono merged back in 2016 to form .NET Core. Which was supported on all major OS platforms and was open sourced. .NET 5 was released in 2020 which merges the rest of .NET, including WinForms. Now all open sourced. .NET 6 has already been announced with a cross platform UI framework. So enterprisey and old, it is not.
    - ibraheemdev 6y ago
      Yup .NET Core being cross-platform and open-source is a huge deal, and Blazor looks really cool, but I still don't think the way people look at C# is going to change.
    - MereInterest 6y ago
      Makes sense, and thank you for the updated information. I was looking into C# about a decade ago, and decided against it for the reasons I mentioned. I'm glad to hear that it continued to progress, though I'm a bit too invested in C++ at the moment to revisit that earlier decision.
- hackerfromthefu 6y ago
  Wow, that's just your particular bubble, but you write as though you're speaking for everyone .. it's exactly that kind of myopia the parent comment was pointing out.
  - ibraheemdev 6y ago
    I'm not speaking for everyone, I am just stating my opinion: > I don't think anything will change that perspective.
tptacek 6y ago
The programs Palmer is talking about already exist, and are already implemented in C and C++, languages without managed runtimes. Rust is interesting here because it is memory safe and also doesn't have a managed runtime.
carapace 6y ago
A programmer's opinions of various technologies is highly trajectory-dependent. The problem of uneven distribution of lore is exacerbated by two startling factors: we tend to be ignorant of the history of our field; and we are fashion-driven to a fault. I suspect that's how you get educated intelligent people with, um, unusual ideas about things. (E.g. I've worked with fellows who did not know who Alan Kay was, or what Prolog is.) In re: Rust, Graydon Hoare gave a talk on the history of compilers in which he doesn't mention Prolog. https://thenewstack.io/rust-creator-graydon-hoare-recounts-the-history-of-compilers/ https://thenewstack.io/rust-creator-graydon-hoare-recounts-t... I suppose he just didn't think it was relevant, but it's possible even he is a little ignorant? I see a ray of sunshine in the form of a nascent and inchoate new paradigm that could be called "Categorical Programming", Conal Elliott has the scent: http://conal.net/papers/compiling-to-categories/ http://conal.net/papers/compiling-to-categories/ CT provides a mathematical formalism for finding the most highly factored forms of various functions/programs, enabling a kind of "convergence" of code to its most efficient form. But that's a big ol' tangent. My point is, it's often more informative to try to understand the context in which something someone says makes sense, than to just decry them as wrong. Oh, and to remind folks to read your history!

I love when I read about languages and they completely ignore .NET and C#. Like it hasn't advanced in leaps and bounds.

by DonnyV 6y ago

I love when I read about languages and they completely ignore .NET and C#. Like it hasn't advanced in leaps and bounds.

pjmlp 6y ago

And everything that has existed outside Bell Labs and UNIX.

ibraheemdev 6y ago

.NET will always be looked at as enterprisey, and old school. I agree that it has advanced a lot, but I don't think anything will change that perspective.

MereInterest 6y ago
And Windows-only. I know that Mono has made some good strides, but relying on it for the language itself adds a much bigger risk factor.
- DonnyV 6y ago
  This is exactly the mindset of a lot of developers that don't even bother looking at .NET. If you did. You would know that .NET is far beyond offering Mono. .NET and Mono merged back in 2016 to form .NET Core. Which was supported on all major OS platforms and was open sourced. .NET 5 was released in 2020 which merges the rest of .NET, including WinForms. Now all open sourced. .NET 6 has already been announced with a cross platform UI framework. So enterprisey and old, it is not.
  - ibraheemdev 6y ago
    Yup .NET Core being cross-platform and open-source is a huge deal, and Blazor looks really cool, but I still don't think the way people look at C# is going to change.
  - MereInterest 6y ago
    Makes sense, and thank you for the updated information. I was looking into C# about a decade ago, and decided against it for the reasons I mentioned. I'm glad to hear that it continued to progress, though I'm a bit too invested in C++ at the moment to revisit that earlier decision.
hackerfromthefu 6y ago
Wow, that's just your particular bubble, but you write as though you're speaking for everyone .. it's exactly that kind of myopia the parent comment was pointing out.
- ibraheemdev 6y ago
  I'm not speaking for everyone, I am just stating my opinion: > I don't think anything will change that perspective.

tptacek 6y ago

The programs Palmer is talking about already exist, and are already implemented in C and C++, languages without managed runtimes. Rust is interesting here because it is memory safe and also doesn't have a managed runtime.

carapace 6y ago

A programmer's opinions of various technologies is highly trajectory-dependent. The problem of uneven distribution of lore is exacerbated by two startling factors: we tend to be ignorant of the history of our field; and we are fashion-driven to a fault. I suspect that's how you get educated intelligent people with, um, unusual ideas about things. (E.g. I've worked with fellows who did not know who Alan Kay was, or what Prolog is.) In re: Rust, Graydon Hoare gave a talk on the history of compilers in which he doesn't mention Prolog. https://thenewstack.io/rust-creator-graydon-hoare-recounts-the-history-of-compilers/ https://thenewstack.io/rust-creator-graydon-hoare-recounts-t... I suppose he just didn't think it was relevant, but it's possible even he is a little ignorant? I see a ray of sunshine in the form of a nascent and inchoate new paradigm that could be called "Categorical Programming", Conal Elliott has the scent: http://conal.net/papers/compiling-to-categories/ http://conal.net/papers/compiling-to-categories/ CT provides a mathematical formalism for finding the most highly factored forms of various functions/programs, enabling a kind of "convergence" of code to its most efficient form. But that's a big ol' tangent. My point is, it's often more informative to try to understand the context in which something someone says makes sense, than to just decry them as wrong. Oh, and to remind folks to read your history!