JPDev@programming.dev to Programmer Humor@programming.dev · 1 year agodotnet developerprogramming.devimagemessage-square9fedilinkarrow-up12arrow-down10
arrow-up12arrow-down1imagedotnet developerprogramming.devJPDev@programming.dev to Programmer Humor@programming.dev · 1 year agomessage-square9fedilink
minus-squareaberrate_junior_beatnik@midwest.sociallinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up0·1 year agoOk, but we all should admit: .net is a terrible name.
minus-squareneutron@thelemmy.clublinkfedilinkarrow-up0·1 year agoAnd then there’s .net classic and .net core. Making up two entirely separate names shouldn’t be difficult for marketing executives.
minus-squaredan@upvote.aulinkfedilinkarrow-up0·edit-21 year ago.NET Core doesn’t exist any more. It’s just .NET now. I think that changed around the release of .NET 5? The classic version is mostly legacy at this point too.
minus-squareNegativeInf@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up0·1 year agoJust because it’s no longer supported doesn’t mean there’s not some poor intern refactoring spaghetti backend in a basement somewhere using it.
minus-squareZangoose@lemmy.onelinkfedilinkarrow-up0·1 year agoHi, it’s me, the intern refactoring the spaghetti .NET core backend. I’m not in a basement though. AMA
minus-squareneutron@thelemmy.clublinkfedilinkarrow-up1·1 year agoI am so sorry, man. No one deserves this.
Ok, but we all should admit: .net is a terrible name.
And then there’s .net classic and .net core. Making up two entirely separate names shouldn’t be difficult for marketing executives.
.NET Core doesn’t exist any more. It’s just .NET now. I think that changed around the release of .NET 5?
The classic version is mostly legacy at this point too.
Just because it’s no longer supported doesn’t mean there’s not some poor intern refactoring spaghetti backend in a basement somewhere using it.
Hi, it’s me, the intern refactoring the spaghetti .NET core backend. I’m not in a basement though. AMA
I am so sorry, man. No one deserves this.