4 ms·

I'm a little bit amused by the inclusion of .NET in this article. The last time I pulled in more than Dapper I was using .NET Framework 4.8. Batteries are very

by bob1029 8mo ago

I'm a little bit amused by the inclusion of .NET in this article. The last time I pulled in more than Dapper I was using .NET Framework 4.8. Batteries are very included now. Perhaps a cooldown on dapper and maybe two other things would protect me to some degree, but when you have 3rd party dependencies you can literally count on one hand, it's hard to lose track of this stuff over time. I'd notice any dependency upgrade like a flashing neon sign because it happens so rarely. It's a high signal event. I've got a lot of time to audit them when they occur.

skeeter2020 8mo ago
I think there's a lot more than you might initially realize. A few of the top of my head (beyond your ORM): automapper, 3rd-part json or Polly, logging, server-side validation, many more. Another vector: unlikely a lot of other languages I've found way more .net libraries for 3rd party connectors or systems are community-based. .NET definitely includes more these days, including lots of the things I've mentioned above, but they're often not as good and you likely have legacy dependencies.
- hirvi74 8mo ago
  I disagree. I also believe you might be equating your preferences with necessities. Much of what you listed is absolutely not needed, and often just brings in more external dependencies of questionable benefit. Take AutoMapper, for example, I cannot stand the tool, but many people enjoy it. I (sarcastically) bet many were thrilled when Jimmy, the maintainer decided to change to a paid license years after its release and heavy adoption. I would argue .NET is roughly just as feature packed as many other frameworks, if not more so. I am glad many popular 3rd-party libraries are not baked into .NET. I do not want frameworks to be rife with garbage no one needs. Keep them lean and keep them mean. Though, I will agree with you on logging. I do believe that the 3rd-party solutions are better.

by bob1029 8mo ago

skeeter2020 8mo ago

I think there's a lot more than you might initially realize. A few of the top of my head (beyond your ORM): automapper, 3rd-part json or Polly, logging, server-side validation, many more. Another vector: unlikely a lot of other languages I've found way more .net libraries for 3rd party connectors or systems are community-based. .NET definitely includes more these days, including lots of the things I've mentioned above, but they're often not as good and you likely have legacy dependencies.

hirvi74 8mo ago
I disagree. I also believe you might be equating your preferences with necessities. Much of what you listed is absolutely not needed, and often just brings in more external dependencies of questionable benefit. Take AutoMapper, for example, I cannot stand the tool, but many people enjoy it. I (sarcastically) bet many were thrilled when Jimmy, the maintainer decided to change to a paid license years after its release and heavy adoption. I would argue .NET is roughly just as feature packed as many other frameworks, if not more so. I am glad many popular 3rd-party libraries are not baked into .NET. I do not want frameworks to be rife with garbage no one needs. Keep them lean and keep them mean. Though, I will agree with you on logging. I do believe that the 3rd-party solutions are better.