mrsmrtss

6 ms·

61.
by mrsmrtss 10mo ago
But it's improving fast. They even made the new file-based apps target Native AOT by default ( https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/core/whats-new/dotn... ).
62.
by mrsmrtss 10mo ago
For new .NET SDK style projects you hardly ever need to customize the defaults and I know it's used for more stuff than .NET, but I just wanted to give an example where it actually doesn't suck. Also, you may not need to do everyt
63.
by mrsmrtss 10mo ago
C# can also be compiled AOT.
64.
by mrsmrtss 10mo ago
I would say, C# supports more functional programming than Go. Go is more imperative than a functional language.
65.
by mrsmrtss 10mo ago
The legacy version of MSBuild was really bad, but the modern MSBuild project files for .NET are actually quite concise and clean by default?
66.
by mrsmrtss 10mo ago
Microsoft isn't going to abandon C#, it's just using the right tool for the right job. While there are certainly cases where it is justified to go lower level and closer to the metal, writing everything in Rust would be just as du
67.
by mrsmrtss 10mo ago
Yeah, I agree that Windows sucks, but I would not abandon .NET for this reason. .NET is solid and is only getting better. There is no reason to believe that Google, Oracle, or any other big greedy company is any better than Microsoft. I mov
68.
by mrsmrtss 10mo ago
>If maximum performance was necessary, you're better off using Go because of fast compiler and better performance. That's not true, if anything, C# is faster and also compiles fast enough. https://benchmarksgame-team
69.
by mrsmrtss 10mo ago
You must have been living under a rock. C# is one of the most popular languages out there and it's better than ever.
70.
by mrsmrtss 10mo ago
So, everyone who can hack some JS is now a developer? The '100x' claim is obviously exaggerated. C# is certainly one of the most used programming languages there is. You can run also C# code very quickly, but have the option (but
71.
by mrsmrtss 11mo ago
>Full stack batteries included frameworks ... You have just described here .NET (ASP.NET)?
72.
by mrsmrtss 11mo ago
>recommend anyone ever touch anything MS has any part in. Curious, why?
73.
by mrsmrtss 11mo ago
>It used to suck When and what were the better alternatives back then? Being stuck to Windows sucked, I agree, but the tech was always solid. > Microsoft was historically only used because it was Microsoft, not because it was the best
74.
by mrsmrtss 11mo ago
> Today, seeing .net in a shop is a red flag for me at least (choosing .net for Web work, to clarify) For me, it's a huge red flag when people have opinions on stuff they know nothing about.
75.
by mrsmrtss 11mo ago
Yes, I don't know where the misconception that CQRS or Event Sourcing automatically means eventual consistency comes from. We have built, run, evolved, and operated quite a few reasonably sized event sourced systems successfully, and t
76.
by mrsmrtss 11mo ago
Have you also considered C# for Event Sourcing? We've built many successful ES projects with C# and the awesome Marten library ( https://martendb.io/ ). It's a real productivity multiplier for us.
77.
by mrsmrtss 11mo ago
> That's just obviously not true. I generate "code snippets" hundreds of times a day that have zero potential to include XSS or SQL injection or any other OWASP vulnerability. I have witnessed Claude and other LLMs generat
78.
by mrsmrtss 11mo ago
At least C# methods are not virtual by default like in Java.
79.
by mrsmrtss 11mo ago
I agree that changing object state and having side effects should be avoided, but you can achieve both immutability and encapsulation very easily with C#: public record Thing() { private string _state = "Initial"
80.
by mrsmrtss 11mo ago
>Do you think it's acceptable that it took 4 years for Minimal APIs to get validation? Well thay don't call it Minimal API for nothing. Jokes aside, what stopped you from calling validation yourself explicitly? >What about h
81.
by mrsmrtss 11mo ago
Quarkus does a lot of bytecode generation magic at build time, which will give it an "unfair" edge in some scenarious, like this simple serialization/deserialization case in this particular benchmark.
82.
by mrsmrtss 11mo ago
>Everywhere you look there are tons of half baked projects like Blazor We used Blazor years ago and it worked flawlessly already then. Hard to believe it's worse today. And what's wrong with Identity? >progress in .NET is su
83.
by mrsmrtss 11mo ago
>And so has Hejlsberg, apparently, seeing his reasoning for choosing go over C# for tsc It was more related to the fact that the existing TS code was more easily ported to Go, and also .NET AOT wasn't mature enough at that time. Str
84.
by mrsmrtss 11mo ago
Look at plaintext results if you want to compare just servers. Fortunes benchmark has too many variables (including db queries etc) to say anything about server performance. As for fortunes benchmark, for more realistick Java performance nu
85.
by mrsmrtss 11mo ago
Look at plaintext benchmark, if you want to compare just servers. Also look at Spring score in fortunes, which is the more common Java stack and I think a more suitable comparison.
86.
by mrsmrtss 11mo ago
>If i remember right Java's webserver beats ASP.NET in performance benchmarks That's not the case anymore. Kestrel is one of the fastest servers there is, and it beats every Java server out there.
87.
by mrsmrtss 11mo ago
Why would they insist on using Visual Studio? At least you can run SQL Server easily on Linux using docker.
88.
by mrsmrtss 11mo ago
Upgrading a modern .NET (Core) version often means changing just versions in the project file. Upgrading from the old .NET Framework is bit more challenging, but we have also successfully upgraded a couple of Framework projects to modern .N
89.
by mrsmrtss 11mo ago
You can run .NET natively on Mac, if you wish. I would also recommend JetBrains Rider over VSCode; it works on Linux, Mac, and Windows and, in my opinion, is better than Visual Studio anyway.
90.
by mrsmrtss 11mo ago
Unsafe C# is still C# though. Also C# has a lot more control over memory than Java for example, so you don't actually need to use unsafe to be fast. Or are you trying to say that C# is only fast when using unsafe?

More ›