digitalmars.D - Is .NET 5.0 and C# 9 a "threat" to D?
- Jack (6/6) Nov 12 2020 .NET 5.0 is going to be multiplatform[1] and getting alot more
- IGotD- (6/12) Nov 12 2020 1. Users themselves target .NET to their own proprietary system?
- Gregor =?UTF-8?B?TcO8Y2ts?= (16/21) Nov 12 2020 I fail to parse that question. I'm afraid. Do you mean to ask
- IGotD- (7/15) Nov 12 2020 You have to be careful with this one. Let's say you some
- Gregor =?UTF-8?B?TcO8Y2ts?= (17/38) Nov 12 2020 Then again, the .NET CLR implementations that I know of are
- IGotD- (11/20) Nov 12 2020 The question is what "free" means here. If that part contains GPL
- Gregor =?UTF-8?B?TcO8Y2ts?= (6/19) Nov 12 2020 I wrote "free (as in beer)" for a reason above. The basic .NET
- IGotD- (9/14) Nov 17 2020 5. Support for public code generators.
- 12345swordy (9/15) Nov 12 2020 That only threat to D is itself.
- rinfz (6/8) Nov 12 2020 It's been said before and it'll be said again but it'd be nice to
- Gregor =?UTF-8?B?TcO8Y2ts?= (17/26) Nov 12 2020 A heads down working attitude is very commendable, but - watching
- Siemargl (7/13) Nov 13 2020 Not a "threat", but rather another one "nail in the lid of the
- Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQ=?= (3/5) Nov 13 2020 I would not trust Microsoft to support other platforms than the
- Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQ=?= (7/22) Nov 13 2020 Many developers are sceptical of MS willingness to support other
- Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQ=?= (15/19) Nov 13 2020 And just as an example, one "winning" strategy would be to try to
- Siemargl (6/18) Nov 13 2020 ...
- Kagamin (216/216) Nov 13 2020 Here's a list of libraries used by a tiny aspnet core application:
- Paulo Pinto (5/6) Nov 13 2020 Meaning? .NET now has a linker and AOT compilation, so those 32
.NET 5.0 is going to be multiplatform[1] and getting alot more bit afraid D can gain less popularity due to that or even make people switch. What are your thoughts on that? [1]: https://devblogs.microsoft.com/dotnet/announcing-net-5-0/ [2]: https://devblogs.microsoft.com/dotnet/c-9-0-on-the-record/
Nov 12 2020
On Thursday, 12 November 2020 at 15:57:44 UTC, Jack wrote:.NET 5.0 is going to be multiplatform[1] and getting alot more bit afraid D can gain less popularity due to that or even make people switch. What are your thoughts on that? [1]: https://devblogs.microsoft.com/dotnet/announcing-net-5-0/ [2]: https://devblogs.microsoft.com/dotnet/c-9-0-on-the-record/1. Users themselves target .NET to their own proprietary system? 2. What is the license? 3. When you compile to native code, how much extra do you need to add in your distribution and what will the total size be. 4. Can you target bare metal targets?
Nov 12 2020
On Thursday, 12 November 2020 at 16:04:21 UTC, IGotD- wrote:1. Users themselves target .NET to their own proprietary system?I fail to parse that question. I'm afraid. Do you mean to ask whether .NET users are porting the runtime to other operating systems themselves?2. What is the license?Most of .NET is licensed under MIT. It is my understanding that the entirety of the cross-platform code is released under that license. I do not know whether the Windows Desktop version of the runtime includes extra components that are still proprietary.3. When you compile to native code, how much extra do you need to add in your distribution and what will the total size be. 4. Can you target bare metal targets?Not yet. There's a toolchain in the making that has been executables with size less than 1MB. Going from there to bare metal should be quite doable, but footprint would very likely still be an issue. Unfortunately, I don't have a link to the source anymore. I think most of that work is supposed to be formally released in .NET 6.0.
Nov 12 2020
On Thursday, 12 November 2020 at 17:05:52 UTC, Gregor Mückl wrote:I fail to parse that question. I'm afraid. Do you mean to ask whether .NET users are porting the runtime to other operating systems themselves?Yes that is what I meant and if .NET has a MIT license that helps.Most of .NET is licensed under MIT. It is my understanding that the entirety of the cross-platform code is released under that license. I do not know whether the Windows Desktop version of the runtime includes extra components that are still proprietary.You have to be careful with this one. Let's say you some proprietary system which which is using .NET and is MIT. Then you have unittests that can run on your x86 Windows PC target and those link in proprietary MS components, then you must buy a license.
Nov 12 2020
On Thursday, 12 November 2020 at 18:08:48 UTC, IGotD- wrote:On Thursday, 12 November 2020 at 17:05:52 UTC, Gregor Mückl wrote:Then again, the .NET CLR implementations that I know of are massive beasts. Porting them is no easy tasks and I am not aware of anyone who is doing that. This is (part of?) the single static binary compilation project I was referring to earlier: https://github.com/dotnet/corert I believe that an approach like that can be retargeted to different operating systems more easily.I fail to parse that question. I'm afraid. Do you mean to ask whether .NET users are porting the runtime to other operating systems themselves?Yes that is what I meant and if .NET has a MIT license that helps.This is an overview over the licenses for the .NET 5.0 Windows Desktop Runtime: https://github.com/dotnet/core/blob/master/license-information-windows.md So this is quite a mix and the most worrying part are the two libraries under the Visual Studio License. My understanding is that these are not free (as in beer) unless you qualify for a Visual Studio Community license. My understanding is that the Linux version is free of these constraints.Most of .NET is licensed under MIT. It is my understanding that the entirety of the cross-platform code is released under that license. I do not know whether the Windows Desktop version of the runtime includes extra components that are still proprietary.You have to be careful with this one. Let's say you some proprietary system which which is using .NET and is MIT. Then you have unittests that can run on your x86 Windows PC target and those link in proprietary MS components, then you must buy a license.
Nov 12 2020
On Thursday, 12 November 2020 at 19:08:37 UTC, Gregor Mückl wrote:This is an overview over the licenses for the .NET 5.0 Windows Desktop Runtime: https://github.com/dotnet/core/blob/master/license-information-windows.md So this is quite a mix and the most worrying part are the two libraries under the Visual Studio License. My understanding is that these are not free (as in beer) unless you qualify for a Visual Studio Community license. My understanding is that the Linux version is free of these constraints.The question is what "free" means here. If that part contains GPL or LGPL parts then it might be even more useless than a commercial license. You can always buy a commercial license if you want to and if you think the price is fair and then you can do what you want. GPL and LGPL puts restrictions on the distribution including your product. What is usually the most deterring is that you must open up your system for tampering which is a no no for many products. D wins here as it is using the Boost license which is a huge benefit.
Nov 12 2020
On Thursday, 12 November 2020 at 19:24:17 UTC, IGotD- wrote:On Thursday, 12 November 2020 at 19:08:37 UTC, Gregor Mückl wrote:I wrote "free (as in beer)" for a reason above. The basic .NET framework components don't contain anything that is licensed under the GPL/LGPL. It's all open source, but not copyleft. The MIT license is very liberal. You only need to reproduce the license text somewhere in your documentation and you're good.[...]The question is what "free" means here. If that part contains GPL or LGPL parts then it might be even more useless than a commercial license. You can always buy a commercial license if you want to and if you think the price is fair and then you can do what you want. GPL and LGPL puts restrictions on the distribution including your product. What is usually the most deterring is that you must open up your system for tampering which is a no no for many products. D wins here as it is using the Boost license which is a huge benefit.
Nov 12 2020
On Thursday, 12 November 2020 at 16:04:21 UTC, IGotD- wrote:1. Users themselves target .NET to their own proprietary system? 2. What is the license? 3. When you compile to native code, how much extra do you need to add in your distribution and what will the total size be. 4. Can you target bare metal targets?5. Support for public code generators. it must support either LLVM or GCC code generators. If not you are pretty much in the hands of Microsoft and what they want to support. In the future we will see new CPU architecture become more popular like RISC V. If MS doesn't want to support that then support all the targets LLVM and GCC can.
Nov 17 2020
On Thursday, 12 November 2020 at 15:57:44 UTC, Jack wrote:.NET 5.0 is going to be multiplatform[1] and getting alot more bit afraid D can gain less popularity due to that or even make people switch. What are your thoughts on that? [1]: https://devblogs.microsoft.com/dotnet/announcing-net-5-0/ [2]: https://devblogs.microsoft.com/dotnet/c-9-0-on-the-record/That only threat to D is itself. There are features that need to finished and implemented. There are language design issues that needs to be address. The standard library needs a reviewer to prevent Pull requested from getting stale. D needs to focus on its consumers instead of worrying other language development. - Alex
Nov 12 2020
On Thursday, 12 November 2020 at 18:32:59 UTC, 12345swordy wrote:D needs to focus on its consumers instead of worrying other language development.It's been said before and it'll be said again but it'd be nice to have more visible and more frequent (i.e. regular) communication about language direction and developments from the core maintainers. I feel like Atila is even less visible than Andrei was when everyone was complaining about this before.
Nov 12 2020
On Thursday, 12 November 2020 at 21:45:16 UTC, rinfz wrote:On Thursday, 12 November 2020 at 18:32:59 UTC, 12345swordy wrote:A heads down working attitude is very commendable, but - watching from the sidelines, mind you - I get the impression that D could profit from some more aggressive outreach. That means not just talking to the existing community, but also more active advocacy. Reaching out to other communities and organizations, pointing out that D exists, listening to them to figure out their needs, pointing out what it is capable of doing for them etc... To be blunt: this part is sales, but different. It takes a certain kind of character to do this. Technically minded people often tend to dislike doing that, in my experience*. But let's be honest, we all like to listen once someone has started a pitch in a way that made us genuinely curious about some aspect of the product. I wonder now what would happen if the D Foundation could actually hire a person who can present such a pitch convincingly, especially to the corporate world.D needs to focus on its consumers instead of worrying other language development.It's been said before and it'll be said again but it'd be nice to have more visible and more frequent (i.e. regular) communication about language direction and developments from the core maintainers. I feel like Atila is even less visible than Andrei was when everyone was complaining about this before.
Nov 12 2020
On Thursday, 12 November 2020 at 22:11:33 UTC, Gregor Mückl wrote:A heads down working attitude is very commendable, but - watching from the sidelines, mind you - I get the impression that D could profit from some more aggressive outreach. That means not just talking to the existing community, but also more active advocacy. Reaching out to other communities and organizations, pointing out that D exists, listening to them to figure out their needs, pointing out what it is capable of doing for them etc... To be blunt: this part is sales, but different. It takes a certain kind of character to do this. Technically minded people often tend to dislike doing that, in my experience*. But let's be honest, we all like to listen once someone has started a pitch in a way that made us genuinely curious about some aspect of the product. I wonder now what would happen if the D Foundation could actually hire a person who can present such a pitch convincingly, especially to the corporate world.Absolutely, D is like a garage project but garage projects don't really scale. The biggest Achilles heel of the D project is its management or lack of it. The maintainers are technically very skilled but they aren't really of the pure manager material. Small tech startups when they grow, the smart ones get a CEO when they reach certain point. Not only to relieve themselves from some work but also the friends that started the company might disagree and that's when the CEO steps in order to represent the interest of the company. I've seen companies that don't do that and they usually just dissolve because of some disagreements. The D project could need a person like that, a person that work for the interest of the D language. Also mitigate what needs to be done and what is supposed to be the direction of the project.
Nov 12 2020
On Thursday, 12 November 2020 at 22:31:37 UTC, IGotD- wrote:On Thursday, 12 November 2020 at 22:11:33 UTC, Gregor Mückl wrote:[...]The D project could need a person like that, a person that work for the interest of the D language. Also mitigate what needs to be done and what is supposed to be the direction of the project.I've said this multiple times this year. I'm not sure if it's ever going to happen. Maybe a question for the Dconf online Q&A.
Nov 13 2020
On Friday, 13 November 2020 at 11:44:54 UTC, aberba wrote:[snip] I've said this multiple times this year. I'm not sure if it's ever going to happen. Maybe a question for the Dconf online Q&A.Easier said than done...
Nov 13 2020
On Thursday, 12 November 2020 at 15:57:44 UTC, Jack wrote:.NET 5.0 is going to be multiplatform[1] and getting alot more bit afraid D can gain less popularity due to that or even make people switch. What are your thoughts on that? [1]: https://devblogs.microsoft.com/dotnet/announcing-net-5-0/ [2]: https://devblogs.microsoft.com/dotnet/c-9-0-on-the-record/Not a "threat", but rather another one "nail in the lid of the coffin". NET5 eliminates several important advantages of D - native compilation, fast start, inability to decompile, multiplatformy. And NET5 is much more stable for the user. I have experience of simply recompiling a 14 year old application from NET2.0->NET4.5
Nov 13 2020
On Friday, 13 November 2020 at 08:11:17 UTC, Siemargl wrote:And NET5 is much more stable for the user. I have experience of simply recompiling a 14 year old application from NET2.0->NET4.5I would not trust Microsoft to support other platforms than the ones they make money of... All it takes is a new CEO...
Nov 13 2020
On Friday, 13 November 2020 at 08:11:17 UTC, Siemargl wrote:On Thursday, 12 November 2020 at 15:57:44 UTC, Jack wrote:Many developers are sceptical of MS willingness to support other platforms long term. All it takes to wipe it out is a new CEO. Same with Swift. The nail in the coffin would be to not fix those issues in D that require breaking changes (it isn't possible to satisfy everyone, so D has to select which application area to focus on)..NET 5.0 is going to be multiplatform[1] and getting alot more a bit afraid D can gain less popularity due to that or even make people switch. What are your thoughts on that? [1]: https://devblogs.microsoft.com/dotnet/announcing-net-5-0/ [2]: https://devblogs.microsoft.com/dotnet/c-9-0-on-the-record/Not a "threat", but rather another one "nail in the lid of the coffin". NET5 eliminates several important advantages of D - native compilation, fast start, inability to decompile, multiplatformy. And NET5 is much more stable for the user. I have experience of simply recompiling a 14 year old application from NET2.0->NET4.5
Nov 13 2020
On Friday, 13 November 2020 at 09:08:27 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote:The nail in the coffin would be to not fix those issues in D that require breaking changes (it isn't possible to satisfy everyone, so D has to select which application area to focus on).And just as an example, one "winning" strategy would be to try to become the dominating language for gui applications on Linux and go 100% with it at the expense of all other "niches". The current alternatives are not attractive because they either are corporate or lacking (Linux users are more likely to be favourable towards a non-corporate entity). In my view that is not a difficult choice to make given the stiff competition for "generic languages". (And I don't even have a running Linux box at the moment, so I am not advocating.) So it is essentially a management issue. Sometimes you just have to pick your poison and make some strategic moves, because stagnation is the only thing you'll get if you don't make waves yourself...
Nov 13 2020
On Friday, 13 November 2020 at 09:34:08 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote:On Friday, 13 November 2020 at 09:08:27 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote:... In the GUI area, Web interfaces seem to have won. So NET is also ahead. But ASP.core is not so convenient, so not everything is lost.The nail in the coffin would be to not fix those issues in D that require breaking changes (it isn't possible to satisfy everyone, so D has to select which application area to focus on).And just as an example, one "winning" strategy would be to try to become the dominating language for gui applications on Linux and go 100% with it at the expense of all other "niches". The current alternatives are not attractive because they either are corporate or lacking (Linux users are more likely to be favourable towards a non-corporate entity).
Nov 13 2020
Here's a list of libraries used by a tiny aspnet core application: Microsoft.AspNetCore.Antiforgery.dll Microsoft.AspNetCore.Authentication.Abstractions.dll Microsoft.AspNetCore.Authentication.Core.dll Microsoft.AspNetCore.Authorization.dll Microsoft.AspNetCore.Authorization.Policy.dll Microsoft.AspNetCore.Connections.Abstractions.dll Microsoft.AspNetCore.Cors.dll Microsoft.AspNetCore.Cryptography.Internal.dll Microsoft.AspNetCore.DataProtection.dll Microsoft.AspNetCore.DataProtection.Abstractions.dll Microsoft.AspNetCore.Diagnostics.Abstractions.dll Microsoft.AspNetCore.Hosting.dll Microsoft.AspNetCore.Hosting.Abstractions.dll Microsoft.AspNetCore.Hosting.Server.Abstractions.dll Microsoft.AspNetCore.Html.Abstractions.dll Microsoft.AspNetCore.Http.dll Microsoft.AspNetCore.Http.Abstractions.dll Microsoft.AspNetCore.Http.Extensions.dll Microsoft.AspNetCore.Http.Features.dll Microsoft.AspNetCore.JsonPatch.dll Microsoft.AspNetCore.Localization.dll Microsoft.AspNetCore.Mvc.dll Microsoft.AspNetCore.Mvc.Abstractions.dll Microsoft.AspNetCore.Mvc.ApiExplorer.dll Microsoft.AspNetCore.Mvc.Core.dll Microsoft.AspNetCore.Mvc.Cors.dll Microsoft.AspNetCore.Mvc.DataAnnotations.dll Microsoft.AspNetCore.Mvc.Formatters.Json.dll Microsoft.AspNetCore.Mvc.Localization.dll Microsoft.AspNetCore.Mvc.Razor.dll Microsoft.AspNetCore.Mvc.Razor.Extensions.dll Microsoft.AspNetCore.Mvc.RazorPages.dll Microsoft.AspNetCore.Mvc.TagHelpers.dll Microsoft.AspNetCore.Mvc.ViewFeatures.dll Microsoft.AspNetCore.Razor.dll Microsoft.AspNetCore.Razor.Language.dll Microsoft.AspNetCore.Razor.Runtime.dll Microsoft.AspNetCore.ResponseCaching.Abstractions.dll Microsoft.AspNetCore.Routing.dll Microsoft.AspNetCore.Routing.Abstractions.dll Microsoft.AspNetCore.Server.Kestrel.dll Microsoft.AspNetCore.Server.Kestrel.Core.dll Microsoft.AspNetCore.Server.Kestrel.Https.dll Microsoft.AspNetCore.Server.Kestrel.Transport.Abstractions.dll Microsoft.AspNetCore.Server.Kestrel.Transport.Sockets.dll Microsoft.AspNetCore.StaticFiles.dll Microsoft.AspNetCore.WebUtilities.dll Microsoft.CodeAnalysis.dll Microsoft.CodeAnalysis.CSharp.dll Microsoft.CodeAnalysis.Razor.dll Microsoft.DotNet.PlatformAbstractions.dll Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore.dll Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore.Abstractions.dll Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore.Relational.dll Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore.SqlServer.dll Microsoft.Extensions.Caching.Abstractions.dll Microsoft.Extensions.Caching.Memory.dll Microsoft.Extensions.Configuration.dll Microsoft.Extensions.Configuration.Abstractions.dll Microsoft.Extensions.Configuration.Binder.dll Microsoft.Extensions.Configuration.EnvironmentVariables.dll Microsoft.Extensions.Configuration.FileExtensions.dll Microsoft.Extensions.DependencyInjection.dll Microsoft.Extensions.DependencyInjection.Abstractions.dll Microsoft.Extensions.DependencyModel.dll Microsoft.Extensions.FileProviders.Abstractions.dll Microsoft.Extensions.FileProviders.Composite.dll Microsoft.Extensions.FileProviders.Embedded.dll Microsoft.Extensions.FileProviders.Physical.dll Microsoft.Extensions.FileSystemGlobbing.dll Microsoft.Extensions.Hosting.Abstractions.dll Microsoft.Extensions.Localization.dll Microsoft.Extensions.Localization.Abstractions.dll Microsoft.Extensions.Logging.dll Microsoft.Extensions.Logging.Abstractions.dll Microsoft.Extensions.ObjectPool.dll Microsoft.Extensions.Options.dll Microsoft.Extensions.Primitives.dll Microsoft.Extensions.WebEncoders.dll Microsoft.Net.Http.Headers.dll Microsoft.Win32.Primitives.dll Microsoft.Win32.Registry.dll Newtonsoft.Json.dll Newtonsoft.Json.Bson.dll Remotion.Linq.dll Swashbuckle.AspNetCore.dll Swashbuckle.AspNetCore.Swagger.dll Swashbuckle.AspNetCore.SwaggerGen.dll Swashbuckle.AspNetCore.SwaggerUI.dll System.AppContext.dll System.Buffers.dll System.Collections.dll System.Collections.Concurrent.dll System.Collections.Immutable.dll System.Collections.NonGeneric.dll System.Collections.Specialized.dll System.ComponentModel.dll System.ComponentModel.Annotations.dll System.ComponentModel.EventBasedAsync.dll System.ComponentModel.Primitives.dll System.ComponentModel.TypeConverter.dll System.Composition.AttributedModel.dll System.Composition.Convention.dll System.Composition.Hosting.dll System.Composition.Runtime.dll System.Composition.TypedParts.dll System.Configuration.ConfigurationManager.dll System.Console.dll System.Data.Common.dll System.Data.SqlClient.dll System.Diagnostics.Contracts.dll System.Diagnostics.Debug.dll System.Diagnostics.DiagnosticSource.dll System.Diagnostics.FileVersionInfo.dll System.Diagnostics.PerformanceCounter.dll System.Diagnostics.Process.dll System.Diagnostics.StackTrace.dll System.Diagnostics.TextWriterTraceListener.dll System.Diagnostics.Tools.dll System.Diagnostics.TraceSource.dll System.Diagnostics.Tracing.dll System.Drawing.Primitives.dll System.Dynamic.Runtime.dll System.Globalization.dll System.Globalization.Calendars.dll System.Globalization.Extensions.dll System.Interactive.Async.dll System.IO.dll System.IO.Abstractions.dll System.IO.Compression.dll System.IO.Compression.ZipFile.dll System.IO.FileSystem.dll System.IO.FileSystem.DriveInfo.dll System.IO.FileSystem.Primitives.dll System.IO.FileSystem.Watcher.dll System.IO.IsolatedStorage.dll System.IO.MemoryMappedFiles.dll System.IO.Pipelines.dll System.IO.Pipes.dll System.IO.UnmanagedMemoryStream.dll System.Linq.dll System.Linq.Expressions.dll System.Linq.Parallel.dll System.Linq.Queryable.dll System.Memory.dll System.Net.Http.dll System.Net.NameResolution.dll System.Net.NetworkInformation.dll System.Net.Ping.dll System.Net.Primitives.dll System.Net.Requests.dll System.Net.Security.dll System.Net.Sockets.dll System.Net.WebHeaderCollection.dll System.Net.WebSockets.dll System.Net.WebSockets.Client.dll System.Numerics.Vectors.dll System.ObjectModel.dll System.Private.ServiceModel.dll System.Reflection.dll System.Reflection.DispatchProxy.dll System.Reflection.Extensions.dll System.Reflection.Metadata.dll System.Reflection.Primitives.dll System.Resources.Reader.dll System.Resources.ResourceManager.dll System.Resources.Writer.dll System.Runtime.dll System.Runtime.CompilerServices.Unsafe.dll System.Runtime.CompilerServices.VisualC.dll System.Runtime.Extensions.dll System.Runtime.Handles.dll System.Runtime.InteropServices.dll System.Runtime.InteropServices.RuntimeInformation.dll System.Runtime.Numerics.dll System.Runtime.Serialization.Formatters.dll System.Runtime.Serialization.Json.dll System.Runtime.Serialization.Primitives.dll System.Runtime.Serialization.Xml.dll System.Security.AccessControl.dll System.Security.Claims.dll System.Security.Cryptography.Algorithms.dll System.Security.Cryptography.Cng.dll System.Security.Cryptography.Csp.dll System.Security.Cryptography.Encoding.dll System.Security.Cryptography.Primitives.dll System.Security.Cryptography.X509Certificates.dll System.Security.Cryptography.Xml.dll System.Security.Permissions.dll System.Security.Principal.dll System.Security.Principal.Windows.dll System.Security.SecureString.dll System.ServiceModel.NetTcp.dll System.ServiceModel.Primitives.dll System.Text.Encoding.dll System.Text.Encoding.CodePages.dll System.Text.Encoding.Extensions.dll System.Text.Encodings.Web.dll System.Text.RegularExpressions.dll System.Threading.dll System.Threading.Overlapped.dll System.Threading.Tasks.dll System.Threading.Tasks.Extensions.dll System.Threading.Tasks.Parallel.dll System.Threading.Thread.dll System.Threading.ThreadPool.dll System.Threading.Timer.dll System.ValueTuple.dll System.Xml.ReaderWriter.dll System.Xml.XDocument.dll System.Xml.XmlDocument.dll System.Xml.XmlSerializer.dll System.Xml.XPath.dll System.Xml.XPath.XDocument.dll 214 files, 32mb.
Nov 13 2020
On Friday, 13 November 2020 at 14:14:33 UTC, Kagamin wrote:[...]Meaning? .NET now has a linker and AOT compilation, so those 32 mb are just if one doesn't bother to optimize it further. Plus it shows one of the current weakness of D, the amount of available libraries with similar maturity level.
Nov 13 2020