Dieser Bereich kann Inhalte enthalten, die nicht für alle Nutzer geeignet sind. Dazu können unter anderem Texte, Medien oder Diskussionen gehören, die als beleidigend, extremistisch, gewaltbezogen oder anderweitig belastend empfunden werden. Wenn du solche Inhalte nicht sehen möchtest, nutze bitte die jeweiligen Filter- und Meldeoptionen der Plattform oder meide entsprechende Threads/Communities.
I tried to use C++ in 1991 but the Borland Turbo C++ compiler was too buggy, so we used C instead. By 1996 C++ was “ready for primetime” on IBM-compatible PCs (yes, they still called them that, sometimes in 1996) and I switched - for 30 years.
I just spent 10 days building a proof of concept in Python, all the “common wisdom” says that was the fast way to get it done. Now that the prototype is done and the (initial) user feedback is addressed, I’m running a port to something better for lightweight, performant, easy deployment… sadly, C++ isn’t even on the radar for potential targets - top 3 candidates were Go, Rust and C#. I can’t abide the C# ecosystem, and Rust is just a little too rigid and immature for my tastes, so here we Go… anticipated to take 50% longer to port from Python than the Python took to develop in the first place… we shall see…
Why not? I like working in C#, so I’m curious what about the ecosystem bothers you.
My perception is one of a treadmill. My fellow developers in C# are much more frequently analyzing migration from one incarnation to the next, updating and installing their license files, evaluating compatibility between versions, and generally spinning their wheels on things not required for getting work done on other platforms.
Yeah, fair. New versions release every year. It’s usually good stuff, but it does add some toil to existing codebases.
Back in the day, I was getting a new “99% compatible” DOS version every 6 months (until we transitioned to the PharLap 32 bit extender, got more memory to work with AND stopped the perpetual upgrade treadmill.)
That “99% compatible” thing means: in a 10,000 LOC codebase, you’ve got 100 things to fix before it works on the new DOS.
I really liked working with Qt from 2006-2024 or so, the only major break was 4-5 (must admit, I never migrated to 6, and nobody forced me to…) and the migration from 4-5 was less painful than a DOS version bump. Also, Qt fully insulated our code from garbage changes happening at lower layers.
Most of my version-upgrade woes seem comparatively recent, lol
Yeah, I’ve had to do that a few times lately. Really tweaked me when gcc transitioned things from warnings to errors.
Are we on .NET 7? No, only 8 is available here without unreasonable effort to backdate. Does the .NET 7 code run in 8 without mods? Yes, but that doesn’t change the hassle of talking endlessly about it.
No. We weren’t. This one was about a decade ago, around the time they first released .NET Core.
Eh…ideally you’d have the conversation once, around what upgrade strategy to use, then execute on it. Upgrade yearly vs. ride out LTS windows. Etc.
Yeah, I’m in a bigger company, so I have the conversation with the local group, then the various other “Subject Matter Expert” groups that touch the same project in their own way, and just when I think I’m done having it there’s some group that submarines up and says “but we haven’t qualified our code to run on 8 so if you’re going to use it you’ll have to pay us to do the qualification, but we’re really busy so that’s going to be about 6 months before we can get to it…”