|
.Net Core is so superior that we can't wait to use it more.
Having said that, it does depend on the apps you build, but for web based apps, it's so far ahead of anything in the full framework, it isn't even funny.
It's nice that it performs well, but that's not the key to why it's so great.
It's the architecture! It's very much like Node.js, but done better and right.
We'll be in production later this year, but we just LOVE Core!
|
|
|
|
|
i'm probably not using it. 
|
|
|
|
|
Things done here are nearly all Windows UI programs, so .Net Core isn't really an option. We don't do web stuff...
|
|
|
|
|
What UI framework do you use at work? WPF or WinForms?
|
|
|
|
|
Both. We're trying to push all new projects to WPF, but, there are a number of older projects that are WinForms that continue to get development.
|
|
|
|
|
Are they stand-alone apps or client-server? If the latter, surely it's worth investigating a web based front end?
|
|
|
|
|
Stand alone. Utilities and some custom UI for CNC controlled industrial machines.
|
|
|
|
|
Ah alright. Desktop apps make sense there for sure. Interesting bit would be when you want to hire engineers. Limited candidate pool and younger people not wanting to work on legacy areas. 
|
|
|
|
|
To an extent. We typically don't get software engineers hired. Mechanical and electrical are by far the most common. Those who show an interest and aptitude for software end up doing our development.
|
|
|
|
|
Interesting approach. Hire smart people and train them as needed.
|
|
|
|
|
That has been the philosophy of the boss since he started the company.
|
|
|
|
|
"We would, but we can't get management to upgrade us from Visual Studio 2012" ?
Truth,
James
|
|
|
|
|
A lot of folks use .NET Core with VS Code (which is free).
|
|
|
|
|
James Curran wrote: We would, but we can't get management to upgrade us from Visual Studio 2012
Sounds like you have more serious problems to deal with then .NET Core. 
|
|
|
|
|
Depending on the likelihood of getting them to change their mind, "probably not" or "no".
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, weighing 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
|
|
|
|
|
Lucky you. We're stuck with VS 2008.
If you think 'goto' is evil, try writing an Assembly program without JMP.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm currently developing micro services in .NET Core.
However, since it's fairly new and not every library fully supports .NET Core yet I use it when possible.
For example, for one component I'm using some client libraries for interacting with Dynamics 365, which was not written in .NET Core so for that application I use .NET 4.7.
I must say I like .NET Core, but it still has some issues as well.
The new .NET Core 2.1 introduced some version specific dependencies which are a real PITA.
And Entity Framework Core just doesn't have all the functionality that the "regular" version of EF has, making it sometimes slow and painful to work with.
And of course then there's the issue of third party libraries not fully supporting .NET Core.
Microsoft seems to be pushing .NET Core though, so I guess I'll just hop on the bandwagon.
It's not all that different from regular .NET anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
It may just be the luck of the draw, but I have still not needed to use this technology/framework yet...in dev, prod, whatever.
|
|
|
|
|
It's the open source/cross platform quasi-replacement for .net, primarily MVC style web apps.
from my understanding, feature parity is close enough to make it a viable option for greenfield dev, but due to the number of 3rd party libs only compiled for the mainstream .net framework trying to port existing sites over is likely to be painful unless they're really small or don't use any 3rd party libs.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, weighing 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
|
|
|
|
|
If you want to do Forms, forget about it, there is no Forms Designer in .NET Core.
It's mainly aimed at backend development.
|
|
|
|
|
RickZeeland wrote: If you want to do Forms
Tech heresy!
|
|
|
|
|
Need is a strong word, but being able to deploy anywhere is definitely an advantage. Plus its performance is way better due to its light weightiness.
I have switched and never looked back. Specially after .Net core 2.0.
It's not a matter of need, but a matter of efficiency. Reduced costs and better performance makes the change a no brainer. But you know, maybe we should just stick with plain old ASP, who needs anything else? 
To alcohol! The cause of, and solution to, all of life's problems - Homer Simpson
Our heads are round so our thoughts can change direction - Francis Picabia
|
|
|
|
|
I don't know, according to the previous comments, it is not fully mature yet. I will wait until then.
Not knocking it, just want it to be heavily used in the marketplace at full maturity before I try it.
|
|
|
|
|
It is fairly mature at this point. .NET Core 2.1 is in production use in many companies. Most .NET/AWS shops use ASP.NET Core.
|
|
|
|
|
Nish Nishant wrote: Most .NET/AWS shops use ASP.NET Core.
Good to hear.
I honestly need to learn it eventually. Just have not had the "need" to, so it will take some self-motivation on my part.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
