Hacker News Reader

Comment by pjmlp | Hacker News Reader

The # declarations syntax for Assembly references.

Assembly references are not really a mainline scenario, hence we support nuget package references only for now. And `#r` is just too opaque (it comes from old times when assembly references were the norm).

I disagree, this is the kind of decisions that make CLR the C# Language Runtime, instead of its original purpose, where there was an ecosystem of common approaches.

Unless you plan to also support the same approach on VB and F# scripts.

F# and C# are intentionally different languages, I don't think it makes sense to have 100% equivalent functionality in both. AFAIK, F# already has scripting functionality built in. VB support could be added, but that seems unlikely given https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/fundamentals/langua...

janjones, can you please advocate inside your team for taking F# seriously? It should have been a first class language inside .net.

I dread the moment C# introduces sum types (long overdue) and then have them incompatible with F#. On a general note, the total disregard towards F# is very much undeserved. It is far superior to the likes of Python, and would easily be the best in the areas of machine learning and scripting, but apparently nobody inside MS is that visionary.

> It is far superior to the likes of Python, and would easily be the best in the areas of machine learning...

The fact that Python is the language of choice for ML makes it clear that technical superiority was not necessary or relevant. Python is the worst language around. The lack of better languages was never the problem. Making F# technically better wasn't going to make it the choice for ML.

Agreed. But MS has certainly some weight to throw around in their own ecosystem. They have their own offerings for data processing and ambitions for AI. If they want to integrate with .net, they are already set. But that requires vision.

Note that until the layoffs of the week predating BUILD, Microsoft was exactly one of the companies pushing for improving CPython performance.

This is why I always mention, when .NET team complains about adoption among new generations not going as desired they should look into their own employer first.

  > they should look into their own employer first.

Indeed, it is a pattern making for some really bad optics.

Why people still beat the dead horse of Python (performance) is beyond me.

I have to agree with others that it's strange this has not been in line with .net interactive and the usage of "#r" there. I think "#r" should at least be an option.

You say that importing other files is not how c# works, but I think that's not entirely true. If you now treat a file as a project then an import is pretty much a project reference just to a .cs file instead of a .csproj file.

So I'd love to see something like that working: #:reference ./Tools.cs

Which should be the same as a ProjectReference in csproj or for a "real" project something like this: #:reference ./Tools/Tools.csproj

That would also enable things like this in a csproj file: <ProjectReference Include="..\Tools\Helpers.cs" />

Referencing other projects is currently out of scope (and might always be, file based programs are intended to be simple), you can convert file based programs to full projects though to regain full functionality.

Thing is, for quick and dirty throwaway scripts, an assembly reference is sometimes exactly what one wants.

E.g. let's say I have a compiled app and I just want to reach inside of it and invoke some method.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com