.Net standard isn't really the same as Ruby or Python specs, not that it isn't welcome but you can't just brush the complexity under the carpet like that.
Also, you have the version number confusion, for example .Net Core 2.0 vs .Net 2.0, one was released 12 years ago, the other in a month. It's all as clear as mud.
> .Net standard isn't really the same as Ruby or Python specs, not that it isn't welcome but you can't just brush the complexity under the carpet like that.
That's exactly what it is, actually. It has several versions, so does a lot of language like Java or C++. If it has more complexity than that, I would welcome you to give concrete exemple of what it contains that isn't in other language's specs.
> Also, you have the version number confusion, for example .Net Core 2.0 vs .Net 2.0, one was released 12 years ago, the other in a month. It's all as clear as mud.
While I agree it may not be clear on the first look, anyone investing more than 2 minutes in .Net understands the difference and is never confused again.
".Net" (this name alone) is the legacy name of what is now called the ".Net Framework", the original and still current implementation of the plateform aimed to run on windows only; what you refer to ".Net 2.0" is ".Net Framework 2.0", and is now always referenced by that name.
".Net Core" is another implementation, one that is aimed at being portable and running on other OSes too.
The table on .Net Standard page makes this very clear, you can see the revisions of the standard on the X axis, and all the implementation on the Y axis, .Net Framework and .Net Core being two different implementation: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/standard/net-standar...
Again, I am not saying the name are very well chosen or super clear to someone who glances at it once every 5 years, but anyone actually interested in .Net needs about 3 minutes to clear that up and never have to ask any question about that again.
Unfortunately, glancing at .NET once every 5 years is what about 90% of the devs around here do (including me). Hence the perennial "WTF is up with the name/version?" sub-thread...
I also like it a lot, since the alpha version made available to selected MCPs.
In what concerns enterprise world, Java and .NET are here to stay.
If you have any doubts regarding .NET, just check BUILD 2017 talks and all Microsoft blogs regarding UWP, .NET is used everywhere, even if the lower level layers are a mix of C and C++.
Even the Windows UI blog is using only C# for all cool UI effects being introduced with Fluent Design.
I'm in the UK so smaller pool unfortunately. And salaries certainly aren't as good as the US! Seems to be a fair amount of C# in city of London/finance etc and fair contracting rates there though.
It really depends on the market. I got out of .Net/MS stuff because that kind of work was bottom-of-the-barrel compared to what I could get by re-investing in my Linux/OSS skills.
In some other places .Net has all the best paying jobs.
> .Net standard isn't really the same as Ruby or Python specs, not that it isn't welcome but you can't just brush the complexity under the carpet like that.
That's exactly what it is, actually. It has several versions, so does a lot of language like Java or C++. If it has more complexity than that, I would welcome you to give concrete exemple of what it contains that isn't in other language's specs.
.NET Standard does neither specify a programming language, there is for example the C# specification for that, nor the runtime environment, where there is the Common Language Infrastructure (CLI) specification with specifications for the Common Type System (CTS), Virtual Execution System (VES), Common Intermediate Language (CIL), and a few other things like meta data formats. The CLI specification also contains a specification for basic class libraries, among them the Base Class Library (BCL). I am not really sure about the exact way .NET Standard and the class library specifications in the CLI specification interact, but .NET Standard essentially defines sets of APIs that must be available in the class library of a conforming implementations.
heh. good on Satya Nadella. stopped using ms stuff more than a decade ago when we went linux for all production machines. from mouth to desktop he has started making microsoft and the good work they do relevent again. - hadnt realised they'd actually released so much linux compatible stuff.
Throw Visual Studio Code in and you can both develop and deploy/run your entire web app on linux using Microsoft tools now, tools that are actually good and pleasant to use.
Predict that fifteen years ago on slashdot and you would probably be "-42 ridiculous" back then.
Also, you have the version number confusion, for example .Net Core 2.0 vs .Net 2.0, one was released 12 years ago, the other in a month. It's all as clear as mud.