3 ms·

For me, another gripe is: “Why do I have to manage a csproj file?”

• codeflo 4y ago
  That’s one of the things that tangibly improved IMO: they removed the file list, so except still being ugly XML, the csproj is now very comparable to package.json or Cargo.toml.
  • philliphaydon 4y ago
    A lot… A LOT better than package.json… And can be edited without unloading the project first.
    • codeflo 4y ago
      Better in what sense? Syntax aside, I don’t see a substantial difference in terms of file content. I do see a substantial difference in terms of tool capabilities (like .NET/NuGet’s inability to resolve conflicting diamond dependencies).
      • GiorgioG 4y ago
        As much as I'm not a fan of the XML based project files, the csproj format is much more flexible/capable than package.json files. For example, you may want to have different versions of a package reference based on some condition. Would it be better w/JSON than XML? I think it's a toss-up.
        • codeflo 4y ago
          That’s a good point. Rust’s cargo files have that feature as well. And I agree that surface syntax isn’t the main issue.
          • fomine3 4y ago
            Lack of comment is a serious flaw for package.json syntax.
• jayd16 4y ago
  Csproj is one of the better build config setups, I'd say. In practice, the IDE handles it all if you want. What would you prefer instead?
• aayjaychan 4y ago
  csproj is fine these days. sln on the other hand...