Hacker News Reader

Comment by cmpb | Hacker News Reader

> There is way too much overlap

It is, at least, good to see Microsoft attempting to prevent the opposite problem (fragmentation) by keeping the .NET Standard up-to-date.

https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/standard/net-standar...

View on HN

DotNet Standard seems, at least in my limited experience so far(<2.0), to be a bit of a clusterfuck. I was trying to write a quick library to do some things, and continually ran into issues where things would compile, and fail with runtime errors upon loading DLLs, or namespaces and types would be mysteriously missing when switching from a lower version of the standard to a higher, ostensibly more complete, version.

Less than 2.0 is more or less an alpha imo. I use 2.0 in production and love it. But not sure how they’re going to get over all the bad PR 1.0 and 1.1 generated.

Yup. Those days were painful. From 2.0 and on it has been a lot better. .Net 4.6.2 compatible libraries will be loaded by the runtime now, so you don’t have to repackage and redistribute every Library that has not already added a DotNet Core target. I’ve only had one library I’ve tried fail due to relying on an API that had not yet been ported to DotNet Core.

That's like over a decade ago right?

DotNet Standard 2.0 was just announced in August

https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/dotnet/2017/08/14/announcin...

I would recommend a bit reading to differentiate .NET Standard (more a spec; currently at version 2.0), .NET Framework (the big fat runtime as part of Windows; currently at 4.7.1) and .NET Core (the slender cross platform one; currently at 2.0.1).

They are very different things and due to the universal misunderstanding and terminology misuse easy to mix up.

I just misread it. The new naming is fubar beyond all belief and it's easy to make mistakes like this.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com