/tech/ - Technology★

It's Java but less portable. Portable .NET applications often bundle entire copies of Mono because actual portability is considered hopeless at this point.

They open sourced it way too late and missed out on developer mindshare.

>>940643

Also, bundled copies of Mono are often not fully compatible with tools designed for MS .NET. This sometimes causes trouble for Unity devs as switch statements and their implementation of coroutines have very different generated code.

You can't fucking build it in Linux.

It's a "platform independent" language like Java, but unlike Java, it only works only on Windows, defeating the entire fucking point of it.

>But muh mono!

Unofficial, not completely compatible

>But muh dot net core!

Too little, too late. Core still doesn't support everything the old .NET did, so many older applications don't work with that either.

>it only works only on Window

You do realize .net is open source and officially supports Linux right?

https://www.microsoft.com/net/download/linux

>>940660

So I can apt-get install dotnet from official repositories where I can be sure legions of communists, faggots, and furries have ensured they're kosher? I'm not taking some shitty hand-made packages from Microsoft.

It's microsoft. It's as if you were using Go.

>>940718

>it comes full circle

>>940718

>I only worked with C#/.Net once and it was to crack a program and that was pretty easy compared to what I was used to. So in some ways .Net is pretty good.

Out of curiosity, what was the general premise of this program and how would your native programming language have complicated its development?

Also, what types of programs do you typically write that are so complex that they usually warrant the use of a non-.NET language?

shitty one-liner threads, that's what

>>940657

>he doesn't know what Dotnet Mono is

lol

>>940781

>he doesn't know .net officially supports linux without mono

>>940781

>he doesn't know that Mono is hopeless and getting an ASP.NET app running on it essentially requires porting

>>940643

This sums it up pretty much. There's a few features it has over Java, but overall nothing to write home about.

>>940881

You know absolutely nothing. No language scales complexity as well as C#. None.

>>941845

20 rupees have been deposited into your account.

C# maximizes ROI and minimizes TCO for Intelligent Apps living in the Cloud.

>>941875

Can you copy paste more phrases from the marketing handbook?

>>941845

Care to expound on that? What does C# have over Java 10 besides a better implementation of generics?

>>940833

>Normally you need to trace through assembly and break on interesting spots, doing it statically is almost impossible. With this program, a sea map with a license key, I used a tool from a company I think is called Telerik and it was similar to a total decompilation. I could easily without running the program track down and modify all the places it connected to the internet and change the license key stuff to accept any key. Helped a lot of old bearded sailors that day!

Pretty interesting dude. I think there's an open source sea map editor too, but the maps are paid for. I forget its name but I saw it on one of my friends that was a ship captain.

https://what.thedailywtf.com/topic/24710/xamarin-s-contiuing-barrel-of-cross-platform-xml-encoding-fut-the-wuckery/

Just putting it out here. I know Xamarin isn't just C#/.Net but it's a good read.

>>941845

What about Kotlin, or Python, or (G-d fordid!) Go and Swift?

They all are really expressive and allow to write software with similar performance (a bit harder to achieve in Python but also doable; for some specific areas even easier)

>>941847

fuckin' lel

>>940628 (OP)

Absolutely nothing. Probably the best MS product that ever existed.

>>940628 (OP)

It's a proprietary language. That's what's wrong with it. That said, it is a very well-designed proprietary language. It's basically what I wish C++ was, but without the proprietorship.

>>942096

C++ is also proprietary.

Only some compilers are free, but so is Mono.

>>942096

So where many things that became standards as time went by.

>>942096

>It's a proprietary language. That's what's wrong with it. That said, it is a very well-designed proprietary language. It's basically what I wish C++ was, but without the proprietorship.

This doesn't hold much water because the Roslyn C# compiler is open source. You can fork it and turn it into anything you want.

>>942011

>What about Kotlin, or Python, or (G-d fordid!) Go and Swift?

>They all are really expressive and allow to write software with similar performance (a bit harder to achieve in Python but also doable; for some specific areas even easier)

Async methods change the multithreading game and they don't have 'em.

>>943568

>Go

>Really expressive

LOL

so all of this is pointless since Mono is doing better and replacing it

that also is not really open source because of proprietary parts

its made in C#

how many more awful ideas?

>>940781

A piece of fucking shit that regularly results in unbelievably poorly optimized Linux "ports".

>>943568

>Async methods change the multithreading game and they don't have 'em.

All of them have them or something equivalent.

>>943671

…maybe except Swift, I don't use apple shit when it comes to programming

>>943662

>1.2MB just for that tiny animation

GIFs truly are cancer.

Just to play devil's advocate the windows devtools seem pretty powerful in the .net ecosystem, and the #F language seems pretty decent all things considered.

>>943671

Something equivalent doesn't count. They have them or they don't.

>>940657

doesn't know about .net core