4 ms·
I agree that LTS should last longer. They made it easier to upgrade between versions though. Perhaps won't help you if you use .NET in patient critical medtech
by AtNightWeCode 4y ago
I agree that LTS should last longer. They made it easier to upgrade between versions though. Perhaps won't help you if you use .NET in patient critical medtech for instance (in EU).
Biggest problem for us is .NET Standard. I don't even understand how it could work on a theoretical level. Maybe it could work if there was no dependencies.
- kcb 4y ago.NET Standard is for libraries only.
- AtNightWeCode 4y agoI know what it is. It is just broken. App A uses a .NET Standard lib B that needs lib C. Since the purpose of lib B is to be as compliant as possible it targets some .NET Standard 1.x. Lib C is used already by the app. And now, dependency hell.
- eterm 4y agoBinding redirects should solve that issue.
- AtNightWeCode 4y agoSometimes. But most .NET devs don't even know what a binding redirect is. They will also break on a regular basis when packages are updated. Edit: The bindings that is. Maybe the devs too.
- voxic11 4y agoI guess I am missing something, why does this cause dependency hell? I guess microsoft is basically recommending against targeting netstandard now anyways so there must be some problem with it. But I don't think I have run into any problems with the situation you described. edit: Ok I see, it seems in that scenario loading the correct assembly is more difficult on dotnet framework and usually requires binding redirects to be specified. On dotnet core/.NET 5+ there are no issues though, which is why I haven't experienced this problem myself. https://nickcraver.com/blog/2020/02/11/binding-redirects/#the-fix-if-youre-using-net-framework https://nickcraver.com/blog/2020/02/11/binding-redirects/#th...
- AtNightWeCode 4y agoIt has never really worked between different .NET versions. Nothing new with .NET 5/6/7. We pretty much banned .NET Standard for any in-house dev.