[throw868788]

I think that's the barrier with C# in general - the framework nature of it means there's a lot of "I don't know what I don't know" especially with ASP.NET which is quite large in scope. Don't get me wrong - that's the usual dev reaction when switching from their familiar language/tools to a new one but I don't think, at least historically, C#/ASP.NET made it as easy as it could of been. Which namespace do I open to import the right extension method to register swagger generation? How do I configure it? All that stuff IS existent actually and having worked with both in my current role the .NET version eventually ends up being a "just works" experience. Its just hard to approach and integrate if you don't already know the "patterns" and the libraries. Sadly there's a lot to learn compared to say Fastify for a basic working app. However it is very configurable and flexible. I've seen the same reaction from dev's to the Spring Framework as well - its just feels bloated for a lack of a better term to people coming from JS.

As per another comment after having seen JS devs switch to F# for very large professional application and not wanting to go back I feel its fine for web. YMMV.

[mattferderer]

> Which namespace do I open to import the right extension method to register swagger generation

If you use the templates provided by .NET Command Line Interface or Visual Studio, you'll get this all baked in & setup.

VS also added a very nice feature where it suggests & imports popular packages if you type a method on a type that's well known. If you already have it added to your project but need a using statement in this file, it'll pick that up fast as well.

They've also improved their docs quite a bit from years ago with lots of good examples for common things.

[throw868788]

These are nice but:

- Templates are no substitute for intuitive and minimal code for a number of reasons. (e.g. how to extend, how to customize, confidence that it isn't brittle if I change one thing, etc etc). If a template doesn't have the exact variation you want (e.g. a faster logging library) the learning curve is very high for a newcomer .NET dev. NOTE: I think this applies to some other OO languages too.

- Suggesting popular packages and namespaces is a great tooling improvement. But it could also imply a closed wall garden. The fact that other non C#/Java like languages don't have this problem even with something as minimal as VS Code as your IDE shows that the tooling is trying to cover over a language and/or library problem. With the Java/C#/other old OO lang workflow you need the knowledge you need to use the library itself (convention based, which class, which extension method, which namespace for that object to configure this feature, startup class conventions, etc). It isn't discoverable even with the packages imported. Remember just getting Serilog working in new ASP.Core and it taking a day or so with all the packages, config, etc etc if you don't already know what you are doing.

I like the improved docs. But fundamentally simplification/minimization is better. I think the dev workflow that means I don't need these tooling improvements is still a better experience. I like .NET, but I do understand when using other languages they seem to not have these issues despite not having the uber tooling that C# has. They don't have package suggestions, they barely even have auto complete yet the library design feels a lot more intuitive.

I can look up say a Fastify, Golang, even some F# examples with something like Giraffe and get a web app quickly with little code and no convention magic with everything being explicit yet concise. No fancy attributes I need to remember, no conventions in my startup classes I need to understand if any customisation, even dep injection is something to learn from people coming from some other platforms rather than just standard library calls composed together.

I actually like the .NET platform, don't get me wrong, I do think it is one of the best web platforms right now. Its more intuitive than Spring/Java as a comparison but that isn't saying much IMO. For newcomers I think the user experience to newcomers who are used to a lot less ceremony could be improved further. My first suggestion would be less "developer headspace required" to get started. On a personal note I think natural F# code tends to favor this from the teams I've been in but can't put my exact finger on a reason as to why - it feels more like coding Go/JS to me at least than C#.

[mattferderer]

I'm curious who does this well? I've personally not found any specific language or framework that is better than others unless you're using their preferred libraries. At that point it depends more on the library authors than the base framework.

For newcomers, I would say the best user experience (no matter language/framework) is provided by code hinting such as GitHub GitLens & competitors do. If I'm using an unfamiliar framework/language it's great at suggesting what I might want without me having to search.

You might really like the new .NET minimal APIs that are being built for web development. They're very similar to a Node.JS style of API.

In regards to logging specifically, I've found swapping logging tools fairly easy & straightforward as far as adding the logging in the code base. If there has been anything challenging it's been outside the code base & setting up the infrastructure or learning the logging's reporting tools. I'm curious what was challenging for .NET with you. It's usually as simple as using Ilogger no matter the tool & writing a few lines in the program.cs file.