[hnthrow289570]

The language itself is nice, the code bases that companies produce with it is not, and sadly that reputation plays into your decision to choose a career stack.

You're going to have patterns from the .NET Framework era being ported to .NET Core projects. It works, but you'll have two paradigms of doing things mixed into your project.

I envy people who only do hobbyist C# so get to work on code bases that have all the newest language feature usage.

[djeastm]

>You're going to have patterns from the .NET Framework era being ported to .NET Core projects. It works, but you'll have two paradigms of doing things mixed into your project.

I've been spending the past couple years migrating various platforms from Framework to the new .NET and as long as you've got a head on your shoulders it's not too bad. Also, new projects in .NET are fantastic to work with, imo.

[progmetaldev]

I have been doing the same, but I would be willing to bet that you're probably more disciplined than the average .NET developer (or at least have taken the time to learn more than just the surface features available). In my experience, most .NET developers don't take the time to really learn the framework (whether traditional .NET Framework, or the Core framework). It is a great feeling once you've got a Framework project migrated over to current .NET and everything is running along smoothly. My experience has mostly been migrating content management systems.

[pipes]

Genuine question, what do you mean by "learn the framework" ? (I mainly work with c#, I constantly worry I am not proactive enough in my learning).

[progmetaldev]

I mean the built-in libraries for .NET (whether that is the older .NET Framework, or .NET Core - now labeled just as .NET). One of the biggest benefits to using C# and .NET is the amount of documentation available. If you are still using .NET Framework, and haven't moved to the open-source .NET, I would suggest spending some time learning the open-source version. It's not vastly different, and the good thing is the C# language hasn't changed very much, other than adding new features for developer ergonomics.

[pipes]

Thanks :)

[rafaelmn]

I definitely dislike most C#/.NET developers/community (every time mediator is mentioned I want to stab myself) and would rather work with people in F#/FP.

But when you have to work on "diverse" development teams having some sort of patterns established (flawed as they are) brings some order to the insanity.

[xeromal]

My brain really likes how organizes C# libs tend to be compared to the 50 different organization schemes I deal with in node and python

[bbkane]

Does C# impose a lot of organization? I've only worked in one C# codebase but it has partial classes everywhere and TONs of abstraction bloat. I found it difficult to reason about the organization.

[mattmanser]

C# doesn't really, but VS + the asp.net framework do.

You kinda have to fight against the IDE to not do a lot of things a certain way. For example, it'll automatically namespace new files according to your folder structure. They've also turned a certain amount of automatic linting on to gently suggest/nag you to write in a particular way.Suggest you write classes in certain ways, use newer language features, declare variables in better ways, etc. You can ignore all the nagging, but it's also incredibly easy for the next programmer to walk in and use the quick actions functionality to 'fix' the code in a few clicks.

And the asp.net core team have been incredibly opinionated, forcing a lot of good coding practices on the community.

So on the plus side, they pretty much forced DI to be the way we all work now. It's worked really well. Most library authors have now embraced it with gusto and you'll have a hard time using new libraries in a code base that's DI incompatible.

The bad side is that sometimes they made bad choices, but they are more minor things. Like they bizarrely went all in on JWT tokens which work really badly for corporate apps. Or the IOptions pattern for global settings which sucks compared to normal env variables in any other language. Lots of confusion over how they work on forums and SO.

[Akronymus]

> You kinda have to fight against the IDE to not do a lot of things a certain way. For example, it'll automatically namespace new files according to your folder structure. They've also turned a certain amount of automatic linting on to gently suggest/nag you to write in a particular way.Suggest you write classes in certain ways, use newer language features, declare variables in better ways, etc. You can ignore all the nagging, but it's also incredibly easy for the next programmer to walk in and use the quick actions functionality to 'fix' the code in a few clicks.

This is why I find a .editorconfig file to be incredibly helpful.

[xeromal]

I don't think I've really seen a partial class since the webforms/winforms days about 15 years ago. Maybe XAML too but I haven't used XAML in so long.

I think abstraction bloat is one of those things that's a preference. What's bloat to one is organization to someone else. When I hope into a python codebase and it's 900 line file doing computer vision madness, I hope and pray for abstraction bloat. I'm sure there are countless c# bloated codebases but I think that's mostly a function of c# codebases being inside megacorporate or government codebases. The bloat comes from the general inefficiency that those companies run at. I guess the same could be said by the scrappy python startups that put everything in a single file with no types or inversion of control or OOP.

I guess I'm saying that I'd rather deal with the bloat problem than the wild west problem. lol

[eterm]

Out of interest, what "patterns from the .NET framework era" do you think don't work well in .Net core?

( I'm someone who deals all day with legacy .Net framework projects, mixed with the kind of mix of .Net core 3, .Net 6, .net standard 2.0, and .Net 8 projects that you'd expect from a 20+ year old company with 260+ projects. And yes, I too envy hobbyists at time. )

[hnthrow289570]

>Out of interest, what "patterns from the .NET framework era" do you think don't work well in .Net core?

Overriding equals to do memberwise comparisons on POCOs

Any checking of types where pattern matching would be better

Old-style tuples without names (old style is tuple.Item1, tuple.Item2, etc.)

Checking of multiple tuple values at once without pattern matching

Any code that could be refactored with the new LINQ methods

Long ifs/switches that could be replaced by pattern matching

Concatenate a lot of strings (one per line) so there wasn't a ton of horizontal scroll, particularly for SQL in C# code

using statements still needing a level of nesting

[g15jv2dp]

Are the codebases produced by companies in other languages nicer?