Latest .NET Core featuer: backwards compatibility
-
-
I don't get it.
They allow you to use references to dlls from .Net Framework now?
Like, what?
-
@masonwheeler OK, I haven't been following that closely.
How does the .NET Standard versions correspond to the .NET Core versions?
Last I checked, .NET Core was only at 1.0.2 with 1.1 just showing up in the VS 2017 preview last week.
-
@powerlord It looks like an attempt to tame the number of branches of .NET that exist now
Introducing .NET Standard - .NET Blog
Questions? Check out the .NET Standard FAQ. You can find the latest version of the compatibility matrix here. In my last post, I talked about how we want to make porting to .NET Core easier. In this post, I’ll focus on how we’re making this plan a reality with .NET Standard.
-
@RaceProUK Yeah, basically
-
@RaceProUK said in Latest .NET Core featuer: backwards compatibility:
@powerlord It looks like an attempt to tame the number of branches of .NET that exist now
Introducing .NET Standard - .NET Blog
Questions? Check out the .NET Standard FAQ. You can find the latest version of the compatibility matrix here. In my last post, I talked about how we want to make porting to .NET Core easier. In this post, I’ll focus on how we’re making this plan a reality with .NET Standard.
.Net Standard is deprecated. The new standard is .Net Alpha, which is currently in a Beta release. In the meantime, use .Net Release for your Development needs.
-
@Lorne-Kates said in Latest .NET Core featuer: backwards compatibility:
.Net Standard is deprecated. The new standard is .Net Alpha, which is currently in a Beta release. In the meantime, use .Net Release for your Development needs.
I can't even tell if this is just a silly joke or completely serious.
-
None of the above.
They did some fuckery to let you load regular dlls, I suspect they have to be PCL compliant.
-
@anonymous234 said in Latest .NET Core featuer: backwards compatibility:
@Lorne-Kates said in Latest .NET Core featuer: backwards compatibility:
.Net Standard is deprecated. The new standard is .Net Alpha, which is currently in a Beta release. In the meantime, use .Net Release for your Development needs.
I can't even tell if this is just a silly joke or completely serious.
It's just a joke.
For now…
-
So.. as a non-MS developer who is casually interested in the .NET Core framework, this changes nothing because the .NET Framework still is not cross platform. Do I have that right? Or does this inclusion of DLLs thing make .NET Framework cross platform?
-
@aapis said in Latest .NET Core featuer: backwards compatibility:
this changes nothing because the .NET Framework still is not cross platform. Do I have that right? Or does this inclusion of DLLs thing make .NET Framework cross platform?
It doesn't make .NET Framework cross-platform, but .NET Standard is cross-platform. And the point is that there's a lot of libraries in the wild that only use .NET Standard features, but are marked as referencing .NET Framework.
Previously you simply couldn't reference such libraries, now the framework does some black magic to redirect the calls to .NET Framework APIs with Standard equivalents. Only when you try calling something that isn't in .NET Standard will you get a runtime exception.
-
@aapis Anything that is .NET Core is defo cross platform. Anything that is PCL compliant is cross platform. Most stuff that isn't either WinForms, WPF or WCF or uses PInvoke has worked fine on Mono for quite some time. There is a tool that you can download that will check the cross compatibility of libraries in a particular project. I will have to google it, because I just see whether it compiles are passes unit tests these days rather than using tools.
Without testing it myself (I keep my .NET code now portable between Windows 7+, MacOSX, and Debian / Redhat variants of Linux), I dunno. Because they say it works, but then something really fundamental doesn't work e.g. in one of the late betas for ASP.NET core they broke ADO.NET which is pretty important if you are building a web app without Entity Framework.
-
@lucas1 Well, one of the issues with .NET Core was not working with certain external DLLs is because the standard library was refactored.
So, of course, .NET Standard 2.0 will apparently automatically translate those. I suspect it will also automatically add in the appropriate NuGet packages of things that got moved out of the core.
-
@powerlord I think I poorly made my point. I don't trust it with the .NET core stuff at the moment because they have made such a hash of 1.0 release.
-
@lucas1 said in Latest .NET Core featuer: backwards compatibility:
@powerlord I think I poorly made my point. I don't trust it with the .NET core stuff at the moment because they have made such a hash of 1.0 release.
Just switch back to VBScript.
-
@Lorne-Kates wait until v22, then you know it's stable and can't get better
-
@Jaloopa Microsoft always get it right on the third release as a rule.
- .NET 1.0 shite .. it was. I remember having to implement core .NET 1.1 stuff and then having to update the dlls to a clients live server over a 56k modem. It was painful.
- .NET 1.1 not so shite - Debugging on web apps was crap, and Webforms was horrendous.
- .NET 2.0 fixed all the problems with 1.1 and is really fooking stable and was the CLR until .NET 4.
-
@Lorne-Kates Please provide a a link to a Microsoft supported VBScript Runtime for MacOSX and Linux.
-
@Lorne-Kates said in Latest .NET Core featuer: backwards compatibility:
@lucas1 said in Latest .NET Core featuer: backwards compatibility:
@powerlord I think I poorly made my point. I don't trust it with the .NET core stuff at the moment because they have made such a hash of 1.0 release.
Just switch back to
VBScriptAltair BASICBecause if you're going to do it, at least do it right.
-
@anonymous234 Probably still better than dealing with dll version wankery, when some fucker decides to base his whole library on reflected .NET libs and the private vars and methods aren't their anymore.
-
@anonymous234 said in Latest .NET Core featuer: backwards compatibility:
@Lorne-Kates said in Latest .NET Core featuer: backwards compatibility:
@lucas1 said in Latest .NET Core featuer: backwards compatibility:
@powerlord I think I poorly made my point. I don't trust it with the .NET core stuff at the moment because they have made such a hash of 1.0 release.
Just switch back to
VBScriptAltair BASICBecause if you're going to do it, at least do it right.
I really want someone to implement an OS in this language:
-
@lucas1 said in Latest .NET Core featuer: backwards compatibility:
Microsoft always get it right on the third release as a rule.
That's why I still use Windows 3 as my main OS
-
@Jaloopa said in Latest .NET Core featuer: backwards compatibility:
That's why I still use Windows 3 as my main OS
You should have stayed on Windows 1.02 then
-
@TimeBandit or PC DOS 1.1
-
@lucas1 said in Latest .NET Core featuer: backwards compatibility:
@Lorne-Kates Please provide a a link to a Microsoft supported VBScript Runtime for MacOSX and Linux.
Seriously, it's a classic link.
