|
OMG! Do you think they'll be able to get my colander to do that?
98.4% of statistics are made up on the spot.
|
|
|
|
|
Well the designs for my tinfoil hats are getting better and fancier, every week.
Get your orders in early, to beat the rush!
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Microsoft has made a change to its forthcoming ASP.NET Core 2.0 web framework so that it is now incompatible with the Windows-only .NET Framework, causing confusion and annoyance for some .NET developers. Can't keep track of the players without a program
Not sure what's confusing (beyond the accumulation of different .NETs): ASP.NET Core for .NET Core, ASP.NET non-Core for .NET Standard, no?
|
|
|
|
|
Baseline: They F-ed up, big time.
I only have a signature in order to let @DalekDave follow my posts.
|
|
|
|
|
They just can't do new things without breaking the old...
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
|
But didn't everyone know that .NET Core was a separate framework to the "legacy" .NET Framework? I've been building ASP.NET Core apps for about 6 months now - it's different to the legacy version, that much is obvious. You can do practically everything that legacy .NET can do, but in many cases it's done differently.
It seems to me that people have only paid attention to the .NET bit of .NET Core and missed the "Core" bit completely. It's a different framework!
The article also omits that you can use .NET Standard 1.6 class libraries with .NET Core 1.1 web apps.
Quote: Workarounds are available in some cases, such as calling into libraries compiled for .NET Framework from .NET Core, but this does not always work.
Just don't do this.. you'll just cause yourselves even more headaches down the road. 
Now is it bad enough that you let somebody else kick your butts without you trying to do it to each other? Now if we're all talking about the same man, and I think we are... it appears he's got a rather growing collection of our bikes.
modified 31-Aug-21 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
You missed the point... There is a thing called .NET Standard, and both .NET Framework and .NET Core were aiming to that... So all .NET Core code would compile with no problem on .NET Framework (no the other way for obvious reasons), but now Microsoft says it is not so...
.NET Standard | Microsoft Docs[^] - and it is not right anymore...
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
|
I use .NET Standard for my class libraries. I think the idea of compiling .NET Standard to work with the legacy .NET Framework goes completely against the spirit of .NET Core.
There was always going to be trouble building apps on a framework designed to work cross-platform against a Windows-only platform (I would have thought that was obvious to everyone?)
At best, it could only ever have worked as a short-term stepping stone for porting apps completely over to .NET Core.
Now is it bad enough that you let somebody else kick your butts without you trying to do it to each other? Now if we're all talking about the same man, and I think we are... it appears he's got a rather growing collection of our bikes.
modified 31-Aug-21 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
If .NET Core even had a good web server implementation I think this would be fine, but Kestrel is still not ready for prime time. I think they need to get the basics figured out before they try to push the new framework forward. Right now it still needs to lean on .NET Framework to function in an enterprise environment.
I think someone must be watching Angular's release cycle and thinking "If only I could annoy developers this much..."
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics."
- Benjamin Disraeli
|
|
|
|
|
Kestrel will never be ready for prime-time (and I mean to face the outside word), and it is not because of how mature it is, but because of design decisions...
Kestrel designed to host a single web application locally, with the possible most efficient way (speed/resource) and any other concerns (security) should be done on a proxy server Kestrel hides behind...
(I wrote an article about how to configure such proxy)
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
|
Kornfeld Eliyahu Peter wrote: Kestrel designed to host a single web application locally, with the possible most efficient way (speed/resource) and any other concerns (security) should be done on a proxy server Kestrel hides behind...
Agreed, but that's the way things are going.. micro-services and lightweight containerised apps hosted in the cloud (Azure does this very well, I'm sure AWS can handle the same things too). Trying to build heavy enterprise e-commerce MVC site isn't going to work.
Now is it bad enough that you let somebody else kick your butts without you trying to do it to each other? Now if we're all talking about the same man, and I think we are... it appears he's got a rather growing collection of our bikes.
modified 31-Aug-21 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Brent Jenkins wrote: Trying to build heavy enterprise e-commerce MVC site isn't going to work.
I can't see why? Those small 'services' can easily scale, by adding more of them behind the same proxy with a small NLB...
You need 1000 users more - add an other instance of the Kestrel (probably via VM)...
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
|
I was really referring to MVC web apps with thousands of view controllers - the old(ish) way of doing things 
You can certainly create as many services as you like; your front-end can be anything (web app, mobile app, Chrome Extension, desktop app, etc) or anywhere (CDN, stored on the desktop, Windows/Linux services, Cordova app, etc). Having to front-end and back-end tightly coupled together (WebForms, ASP.NET MVC) is a thing of the past though.
Now is it bad enough that you let somebody else kick your butts without you trying to do it to each other? Now if we're all talking about the same man, and I think we are... it appears he's got a rather growing collection of our bikes.
modified 31-Aug-21 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Exactly.
I appreciated your article, btw, but to me the fact that it was needed underlined how wrong-headed the current direction of .NET is. A dependency on a runtime should be enough to handle common tasks. Wiring in new dependency models just adds new things to break.
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics."
- Benjamin Disraeli
|
|
|
|
|
So it's confirmed.
The design team from ms office has been transferred to .NET.
At least now developer-only types will start to understand why the rest of us b1tch, so much.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Most programmers write code for an abstract computer. The thing is- code runs on a real computer that works in a specific way. *Your mileage may vary
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: there’s a 25-100x advantage to using the memory that’s in the CPU’s cache compared to memory that’s in RAM.
Unfortunately, most programmers never think about this.
And thank Jehosephat they don't!
How many machines would burst into flames if every single app, driver, and advert on it were thrashing that memory?
The least that would happen is that bunches of registers would fail, thereby slowing absolutely everything down.
Flag that article as dangerous.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Agreed; and it is not like the architecture differs so much between the clones that there'd hardly be any difference.
In the world of Games where you always need a new machine to play the latest release, where performance is a whole lot more important than, say, MS Outlook, they tend to program more and more against "general accepted programming interfaces". It's called DirectX.
It is also usually not the CPU that is the bottleneck in most of the games 
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
I'm surprised no one has posted this yet: Write in C[^]
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
That's half the story. With relatively little control over WHERE things are allocated, you can easily end up with data scattered all over the memory space resulting in a high incidence of page faults and page faults are even worse than cache misses.
|
|
|
|
|
New algorithms can recreate the images in your mind with uncanny accuracy. But can it guess the card I'm holding?
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, but as soon as you take away the number you first thought of -- and not in mandarin -- they'm buggered!
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Just don't try to picture the robot naked.
|
|
|
|
|
Standards group recommends removing periodic password change requirements. This means I won't have to buy as many PostIt!(tm) notes to remember the password I have to change every 42 days
|
|
|
|
|
"Swordfish[^]"
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
