3 ms·
That's partially attributed to the fact that .NET is a truly batteries included solution and quality of it is generally good enough that there is no need for se
by mrsmrtss 1y ago
That's partially attributed to the fact that .NET is a truly batteries included solution and quality of it is generally good enough that there is no need for second or third alternatives for every basic thing.
- throwaway2037 1y agoI don't doubt your comment, but I immediately thought to compare to Java. Why does Java have exactly what you mention -- "second or third alternatives for every basic thing"? Is it easily explained by age as a language? Also, can you provide a concrete example of something that .NET includes in the core that Java does not?
- metaltyphoon 1y agoIf I were to ask you, how many APIs do you think “core” (w/e you consider core) does Java have. Think of a number before opening the link below and then let me know what you had in mind. https://apisof.net/ https://apisof.net/
- mrsmrtss 1y agoGenerally .NET's "out-of-the-box" experience is comparable to using Java with a framework like Spring, as it includes a built-in DI container, a modern ORM (Entity Framework), a complete web stack (ASP.NET) with the high-performance web server (Kestrel) and so on. Because these first-party tools receive strong support from both Microsoft and the community and set a very high standard, which likely reduces the incentive for third-party alternatives to emerge. Of course, there are also many quality third-party solutions, but these mostly cover areas that are not covered well by .NET. You could happily build a lot of things using only .NET, without needing any third-party dependencies.
- brainzap 1y agoThe stackoverflow survey showed that most people don't write c# in their free time. (compared to python/js)