4 ms·

I agree. The stability comes from its ecosystem though. Enterprise Software. Where things like meticulous use of Omit and Task are common place and really REALL

I agree. The stability comes from its ecosystem though. Enterprise Software. Where things like meticulous use of Omit and Task are common place and really REALLY bad things happen if you fuck up. But besides that, there’s a healthy gamedev community that embraced C# early and have been using it ever since. There’s C++ MFC guys that got duped into WPF and have been supporting it ever since. Winforms devs that are still trying to make a dark mode. I’ve even seen community grass roots “I need this in Silverlight” projects take hold and become one of the largest SDKs in the world. It’s cool. It’s fun. And with AOT, it’s everywhere. C# is like that cool uncle of your Father (Java) that likes to party all night but still holds a job. Maybe someday TS.Net will exist and we’ll all be singing “Back in my day”

pjmlp 1y ago
I very much doubt about TS.Net, given the rewrite in Go decision. .NET nowadays has a serious adoption problem, and they should spend more time talking with their own colleagues at Azure, about their use of Java, Go, Rust.
- reactordev 1y ago
  I know, so sad, could have been a great opportunity.
  - pjmlp 1y ago
    Just like every CNCF project that Azure contributes to, written in Go or Rust, which could have been great carrots to further .NET's adoption.
- thewebguyd 1y ago
  > .NET nowadays has a serious adoption problem It's seriously going to make people question the future of the platform. Look at Microsoft's actions, not their words. TS Compiler: Go New TUI Editor: Rust Winget: C++ (this would have been a great candidate for .NET) At least PowerToys is C#. .NET is great, but why isn't it good enough for Microsoft? The company that historically has had such a strong culture of dogfooding.
  - reactordev 1y ago
    The issue was in the beginning they didn’t think interop with C/C++ was value add. People complained and they added “Managed C++” which unfortunately influenced C++03’s design a lot. It wasn’t until C++11 that Microsoft gave up. You couldn’t effectively interop with C++ without writing a managed C++ wrapper, which only worked on windows. They added support for P/Invoke to aid in Win32 calls (shell.dll, user32.dll) as a simple fix and we went nuts for it. Wrote wrappers using P/Invoke and a config map nightmare of which dll’s, or dylib’s, or so’s, you needed to get the form to show. Fast forward to today… Rust can interop with C natively. Go can as well, though you’re bringing your luggage with you with CGO. .Net hasn’t ever really had that kind of focus. For one, IL, two, Microsoft saw the platform as a cash cow, three, ecosystem lock in allowed a thriving “MVP” contractor community.
    - lowleveldesign 1y ago
      Interestingly, the Rust windows crate is generated from an MSIL assembly. And same metadata might be used to generate C# bindings thanks to cswin32 [1] project. The meta-assembly generation (Win32 metadata project) is based on clangsharp and it's fairly straightforward to generate interop code for native Windows libraries. Some time ago I described this process on my blog for the detours library [2] [1] https://github.com/microsoft/CsWin32 https://github.com/microsoft/CsWin32 [2] https://lowleveldesign.org/2023/11/23/generating-c-bindings-for-native-windows-libraries/ https://lowleveldesign.org/2023/11/23/generating-c-bindings-...
      - reactordev 1y ago
        The point is why is another language generating anything for C#?
      - contextfree 1y ago
        Yes, and this approach is an extension of the one taken with WinRT metadata which is also ".NET assembly" based.
    - pjmlp 1y ago
- 9cb14c1ec0 1y ago
  Not sure I agree on the adoption problem. A few medium sized client projects are nothing compared to the massive internal .NET codebases Microsoft has that run some of their largest services.
  - pjmlp 1y ago
    .NET team members have acknowledged this on podcast interviews, .NET Rocks, Nick Chapsas, The Unhadled Exception, among possibly others.
- cogman10 1y ago
  I blame historic microsoft for their anti-oss stance. It kneecapped the .net ecosystem for over a decade and created an attitude of "if it isn't in .NET, I won't use it".
  - reactordev 1y ago
    I agree as well. The hostile attitude towards OSS under Ballmer led to this. Nadella had the correct approach and a year later, started repairing those bridges, joining the Linux Foundation.
    - pjmlp 1y ago
      Many things under Satya also feel like good old Microsoft, like lack of GUI frameworks for GNU/Linux, killing VS4Mac after the rewrite, dotnet watch drama, profiling tools being VS only,...
      - runevault 1y ago
        MAUI not supporting Linux feels like such a huge whiff. It is clearly possible to get at least decent cross platform support that includes linux in .net considering Avalonia exists.
        nic547 1y ago
        MAUI is supposed to use native ui components, AvaloniaUI just uses Skia. I think going with a non-native approach would kinda make Linux a clear second class platform, especially with all the native features that need to be rebuilt? Is there any multiplatform ui framework that's actually "native" for all the different linux ui toolkits?
      - reactordev 1y ago
        VS4Mac deserved to die, that was Mono Code aka Xamarin and it was terrible. No offense to Miguel, mono is amazing, but the IDE they made was horrid. Microsoft was asleep at the wheel the last decade of Ballmer, leaning too heavily on their Xbox Studios and Enterprise Cloud to care about desktops. They gladly let Mac take office share as “no enterprise software developer would ever choose a Mac”. Those famous Mac vs PC ads. The GUI development story has plagued us for a long time. No one wants to take on the challenge of a unified user interface spec. Why? Because it will always be wrong - ever changing - and a giant suck of corporate resources. It’s better to let each team think of their own way of doing things. Then, they can choose the best of them and release them as frameworks (WPF) only to be abandoned by the next regime change. MAUI, UWA, Metro, WPF, all an attempt to save what effort they have made. Ultimately, everyone loves their Electron apps, so HTML has become to new UI paradigm. They move too slowly. Convinced “they know better than you” and will spend the next 5 years hyping up the next XML abomination.
- mathverse 1y ago
  I would not touch C# unless you are already using it. Microsoft proves over and over it cannot be trusted in what they say. Watch what they do: - basically dont use ant UI framework they say is the future and they are not using themselves - be vary of the future of some of it stuff like C#
  - reactordev 1y ago
    Oh I learned this the hard way. Managed DirectX, XNA, Creators Club, Windows Store, shared profit motive, fair business practices, Project Natal/Kinect, Azure, and finally… .Net. Yup, Microsoft loves developers… loves their subscriptions.
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
  - adabyron 1y ago
    C# has been around a long enough time and Microsoft's teams over that time have done a pretty good job making upgrading each version easy. As long as the current leadership in the C# & .NET teams remain, it's a very safe language and framework to use. They also deserve huge kudos to API & performance improvements the past decade since moving on from .NET Framework 4.x, which still runs fine. They also have a lot of internal & external users using it.
rictic 1y ago
What's Omit refer to in this context?
- reactordev 1y ago
  The 14,000~ instances of T? or _

pjmlp 1y ago

I very much doubt about TS.Net, given the rewrite in Go decision. .NET nowadays has a serious adoption problem, and they should spend more time talking with their own colleagues at Azure, about their use of Java, Go, Rust.

reactordev 1y ago
I know, so sad, could have been a great opportunity.
- pjmlp 1y ago
  Just like every CNCF project that Azure contributes to, written in Go or Rust, which could have been great carrots to further .NET's adoption.
thewebguyd 1y ago
> .NET nowadays has a serious adoption problem It's seriously going to make people question the future of the platform. Look at Microsoft's actions, not their words. TS Compiler: Go New TUI Editor: Rust Winget: C++ (this would have been a great candidate for .NET) At least PowerToys is C#. .NET is great, but why isn't it good enough for Microsoft? The company that historically has had such a strong culture of dogfooding.
- reactordev 1y ago
  The issue was in the beginning they didn’t think interop with C/C++ was value add. People complained and they added “Managed C++” which unfortunately influenced C++03’s design a lot. It wasn’t until C++11 that Microsoft gave up. You couldn’t effectively interop with C++ without writing a managed C++ wrapper, which only worked on windows. They added support for P/Invoke to aid in Win32 calls (shell.dll, user32.dll) as a simple fix and we went nuts for it. Wrote wrappers using P/Invoke and a config map nightmare of which dll’s, or dylib’s, or so’s, you needed to get the form to show. Fast forward to today… Rust can interop with C natively. Go can as well, though you’re bringing your luggage with you with CGO. .Net hasn’t ever really had that kind of focus. For one, IL, two, Microsoft saw the platform as a cash cow, three, ecosystem lock in allowed a thriving “MVP” contractor community.
  - lowleveldesign 1y ago
    Interestingly, the Rust windows crate is generated from an MSIL assembly. And same metadata might be used to generate C# bindings thanks to cswin32 [1] project. The meta-assembly generation (Win32 metadata project) is based on clangsharp and it's fairly straightforward to generate interop code for native Windows libraries. Some time ago I described this process on my blog for the detours library [2] [1] https://github.com/microsoft/CsWin32 https://github.com/microsoft/CsWin32 [2] https://lowleveldesign.org/2023/11/23/generating-c-bindings-for-native-windows-libraries/ https://lowleveldesign.org/2023/11/23/generating-c-bindings-...
    - reactordev 1y ago
      The point is why is another language generating anything for C#?
    - contextfree 1y ago
      Yes, and this approach is an extension of the one taken with WinRT metadata which is also ".NET assembly" based.
  - pjmlp 1y ago
9cb14c1ec0 1y ago
Not sure I agree on the adoption problem. A few medium sized client projects are nothing compared to the massive internal .NET codebases Microsoft has that run some of their largest services.
- pjmlp 1y ago
  .NET team members have acknowledged this on podcast interviews, .NET Rocks, Nick Chapsas, The Unhadled Exception, among possibly others.
cogman10 1y ago
I blame historic microsoft for their anti-oss stance. It kneecapped the .net ecosystem for over a decade and created an attitude of "if it isn't in .NET, I won't use it".
- reactordev 1y ago
  I agree as well. The hostile attitude towards OSS under Ballmer led to this. Nadella had the correct approach and a year later, started repairing those bridges, joining the Linux Foundation.
  - pjmlp 1y ago
    Many things under Satya also feel like good old Microsoft, like lack of GUI frameworks for GNU/Linux, killing VS4Mac after the rewrite, dotnet watch drama, profiling tools being VS only,...
    - runevault 1y ago
      MAUI not supporting Linux feels like such a huge whiff. It is clearly possible to get at least decent cross platform support that includes linux in .net considering Avalonia exists.
      - nic547 1y ago
        MAUI is supposed to use native ui components, AvaloniaUI just uses Skia. I think going with a non-native approach would kinda make Linux a clear second class platform, especially with all the native features that need to be rebuilt? Is there any multiplatform ui framework that's actually "native" for all the different linux ui toolkits?
    - reactordev 1y ago
      VS4Mac deserved to die, that was Mono Code aka Xamarin and it was terrible. No offense to Miguel, mono is amazing, but the IDE they made was horrid. Microsoft was asleep at the wheel the last decade of Ballmer, leaning too heavily on their Xbox Studios and Enterprise Cloud to care about desktops. They gladly let Mac take office share as “no enterprise software developer would ever choose a Mac”. Those famous Mac vs PC ads. The GUI development story has plagued us for a long time. No one wants to take on the challenge of a unified user interface spec. Why? Because it will always be wrong - ever changing - and a giant suck of corporate resources. It’s better to let each team think of their own way of doing things. Then, they can choose the best of them and release them as frameworks (WPF) only to be abandoned by the next regime change. MAUI, UWA, Metro, WPF, all an attempt to save what effort they have made. Ultimately, everyone loves their Electron apps, so HTML has become to new UI paradigm. They move too slowly. Convinced “they know better than you” and will spend the next 5 years hyping up the next XML abomination.
mathverse 1y ago
I would not touch C# unless you are already using it. Microsoft proves over and over it cannot be trusted in what they say. Watch what they do: - basically dont use ant UI framework they say is the future and they are not using themselves - be vary of the future of some of it stuff like C#
- reactordev 1y ago
  Oh I learned this the hard way. Managed DirectX, XNA, Creators Club, Windows Store, shared profit motive, fair business practices, Project Natal/Kinect, Azure, and finally… .Net. Yup, Microsoft loves developers… loves their subscriptions.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- adabyron 1y ago
  C# has been around a long enough time and Microsoft's teams over that time have done a pretty good job making upgrading each version easy. As long as the current leadership in the C# & .NET teams remain, it's a very safe language and framework to use. They also deserve huge kudos to API & performance improvements the past decade since moving on from .NET Framework 4.x, which still runs fine. They also have a lot of internal & external users using it.

rictic 1y ago

What's Omit refer to in this context?

reactordev 1y ago
The 14,000~ instances of T? or _