svick

Are you saying that that's a good thing?

Just because something is common doesn't mean it's okay.

> I really enjoy IntelliJ, it makes programming Java like slicing butter.

In that case, I think you want an actual IDE and VS Code is not that. The options you have for .Net are Visual Studio and Rider (which is from the same company as IntelliJ and shares a lot of code with it).

I wouldn't call those libraries. If you have something that's actually just a library, using it from F# should not be a problem.

> While there's nothing you can do in C# that cannot be done in F#

Really? When did F# start supporting pointers?

> to influence the direction of the other language (C#)

Lately, it seems it's the other way around: C# is introducing features like Span<T> or default interface members and F# is (quickly) catching up.

C# 8.0 will have a switch expression: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/csharp/whats-new/csh....

There is no chance VS 2017 will support it, since it already doesn't support .Net Core 3.0.

> You don't simplify something by adding complexity.

Yes, you do, it's called abstraction.

For example, C compiler adds complexity when compared with assembler, but that lets you significantly simplify your code.

And without abstraction, modern software development would not be possible.

Of course too much abstraction can be a problem (which is why some people still program in assembly), but that does not mean JVM will always be the wrong solution.

Except Java's method that does the same (Math.max) does not use generics and instead has overloads for the various numeric types it supports.

Expression trees are a requirement if you're writing a database client library.

How is an issue you had a long time ago relevant now? And why do you say "fix X first" if you don't even know whether it's still a problem?

> Can Microsoft use open contributed WPF code in UWP?

They can, because the open source version of WPF is MIT-licensed.

Where do I get a macOS license that allows me to run it in VMWare?

> It is sending back data about you. And who knows what.

This is specifically about telemetry in an open source code. If you want to know what data it sends, you can look for yourself.

As I understand it, if you ever opened such project in VS, it would replace the wildcard with the current list of files. So the usability of that approach was very limited.

What reflection APIs are you talking about? Do you mean things like AppDomain and remoting?

.Net Framework (and ASP.NET) will be supported forever.

This is just about the specific combination of ASP.NET Core on .Net Framework, which will be supported until 2021, possibly longer.

I didn't hear about Google OR-Tools before now, but they seem to support .Net Core: https://developers.google.com/optimization/install/dotnet/so....

I believe MS said they're considering open sourcing them when they're included in .Net Core 3.0. But either they didn't decided yet, or they decided against it.

Visual Studio depends heavily on WPF and COM. I don't think it's going to be running on Linux anytime soon.

If you're using .Net Core version of csproj, it's the difference between e.g. <TargetFramework>netcoreapp2.1</TargetFramework> and <TargetFrameworks>net47;netcoreapp2.0</TargetFrameworks>.

I don't know if there's a good way to migrate the csprojs automatically (maybe https://github.com/hvanbakel/CsprojToVs2017?), but it shouldn't be that hard manually (by creating a new project), assuming you have just a few projects to migrate.

Note that one difference is that the 2.0 attempt was noticed by a user following commits to the repo. This time, they've made a public announcement about it.

Well, .Net Core started as a subset of .Net Framework APIs. Now that they're adding a lot of them back with .Net Core 2.0 and 3.0, it's no longer accurate.

Though ASP.NET Core was never really a subset of ASP.NET.

Also, .Net Framework still doesn't have support for Span<T> on existing types like Stream. Though those APIs will be in .Net Standard 2.1, so presumably they will be in some future version of .Net Framework too.

But there was no good way to edit .csproj files without an IDE and you needed to edit them for every source file you added (or moved).

Now you don't have to edit them as often (wildcards for files), they're easier to edit by hand (because they contain almost no clutter) and there are also command line tools to edit them (like dotnet add package).

In the past, TechEmpower benchmarks only ran on Linux, so their benchmarks for .Net actually used the Mono project's implementation of ASP.NET, which was slow.

That's why the increase was so significant. If they were comparing ASP.NET Core with .Net Framework on Windows, the difference would have almost certainly been much smaller.

I don't need it. I want it, because C# is my favorite programming language. Isn't that what freedom is about?

This means that when I'm writing a website or a Docker microservice, I want to use C#. And since the best OS to run those is Linux, there are no proprietary MS products in sight.

When I'm writing a cross-platform desktop application, I want to use C# too, but I can't, so I'll use another language.

But only for their work on "the Linux System", no?

> In other words it was very unfair.

How? Linux is intentionally released under an open source license. As far as I know, MS follows that license to the letter. How is that unfair? Things don't have to be perfectly symmetric to be fair.

I do think using the FAT patent was wrong on its own, because it was about interoperability when using the one filesystem that can be used everywhere. But I don't think fairness has anything to do with that.

> And possibly asking for legal action.

What kind of legal action?

Even worse, they don't even attempt to justify how EEE applies to what MS is doing now. Please, at least try to make what you're saying relevant to the story.