3 ms·
Either. It really depends on your use case. The developer experience is a lot better for .net, in my opinion, but it’s also expensive and usually requires wind
by Atotalnoob 3y ago
Either. It really depends on your use case.
The developer experience is a lot better for .net, in my opinion, but it’s also expensive and usually requires windows (yes, Linux .net is completely possible). Microsoft invests heavily into building better, easier tooling from end to end. If you are an azure shop, it’s very easy to deploy.
I haven’t looked at the latest benchmarks, but when I did, c# was a clear winner in performance, multithreading, etc. nodejs isn’t slow by any means, either.
Nodejs excels at speed of development and in BFF patterns like next or other SSG. .net will steer you into better design patterns for maintainability in the future. There are also more gotchas around nodejs which is mostly due to the funkiness of JavaScript.
It’s quite nice if you use nodejs backend and frontend. It’s one language and if you use typescript you can share types!
Bottom line, there are tradeoffs to both. I would be more concerned about your team composition, skill set, and project type when picking between them.
If you held a hun to my head, I’d pick .net
- tomkarho 3y ago> but it’s also expensive and usually requires windows Can you please clarify what exactly is expensive and requires windows as far as .net is concerned? Compared to 2016 the development and hosting experience for at least Linux (can't speak to Macs) has gone forward by a country mile. You can develop practically for free (no need to visual studio license since vs code exists) and target Linux environments during build so no need for windows server either.
- Atotalnoob 3y agoYes, you can use vscode and rider. Rider isn’t free for companies and vscode has some free stuff, but Microsoft came out with a new extension for c# that requires a visual studio subscription. To me, this signals they will be directing the majority of their investment into this, rather than a free extension. The experience isn’t as good in vscode (I haven’t used rider, but it costs money anyway, so still expensive) as it is in full fat visual studio. At work, I use windows and full visual studio. At home, I use Linux and vscode.
- neonsunset 3y agoYou do not need "C# Dev Kit", it's nigh useless if you already used plain C# extension, which has the actual good bits you need. Also, Rider is free if you apply for an OSS license (if you use it for FOSS), or have your company pay for it if you use it professionally.
- pier25 3y agoWhat's the difference between the C# Dev Kit and the C# extension?
- neonsunset 3y agoThe description is somewhat misleading but it comes down to 1. Visual Studio style solution explorer and 2. Visual Studio style tests explorer [0] While the former may be missed by some, I long ago adapted and prefer to normal folder and file navigation, and for the latter there are other extensions to browser the tests. The ability to run/debug specific tests is already included in the base C# extension, while project management is actually easier via CLI the same way you do it with Rust's cargo (dotnet new {templateName}, dotnet new sln, dotnet sln add/remove, etc.). [0] https://marketplace.visualstudio.com/items?itemName=ms-dotnettools.csdevkit https://marketplace.visualstudio.com/items?itemName=ms-dotne...
- munbun 3y agoMS is sunsetting Visual Studio for Apple users in August and encouraging users to move over to VS Code.