517

submitted 1 year ago by anthonylavado@lemmy.ca to c/jellyfin@lemmy.ml

57 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] LordKitsuna@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago

i asked a few people and got the following answers

"cuz: 1: its fake java 2: eats memory like java 3: .net on linux is l-o-l 4: unlike java there is no C# kotlin 5: other better things exist (java, javascript, go) "

"the biggest issue with C# is that its just a fucking pain in the ass to use" (this one got several uses of a "yup" emoji reaction)

"wtf is a compiler macro and why would i use one"

"I dislike async/await garbage in most languages, this includes C#

like you need to designate some functions async and others are non-async and sometimes you run into a situation where you need to block on async from sync and you're basically fucked"

[-] mild_deviation@programming.dev 7 points 1 year ago

I feel like most of them haven't used C# in the last decade, let alone .NET since Core.

[-] kogasa@programming.dev 1 points 1 year ago

is smoking crack. .NET on Linux has been fine for years. Unlike Java there is no need for a .NET Kotlin (and there is F# if you really want a functional-first .NET language). If you want to call Java a "better" alternative to C#, power to you. But Javascript and Go shouldn't be in the same conversation. Hence the crack.
Might be thinking about .NET Framework, which is a pain in the ass to deploy. Modern .NET is completely different. Can't think of many instances where the language itself works against me compared to Java.
So you can conditionally compile code based on build-time constraints. For example, debug logging code can be removed entirely in the release build.
Has a point, but this also disqualifies them from using almost any language with asynchronous programming.