←back to thread

201 points olvy0 | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
blackoil ◴[] No.41878798[source]
Anyone knows of a comprehensive book/tutorial to learn end to end web development in dotnet. Most I have found are elementary, outdated or poor quality.
replies(5): >>41878995 #>>41879009 #>>41879030 #>>41879834 #>>41879860 #
littlecranky67 ◴[] No.41879009[source]
That is because all the hot-and-new in .NET web development is Blazor, and it is not really popular outside of Microsoft's Blogosphere (and IMHO never will be and go down the same way as Silverlight did). The "venerable" technologies are still present in .NET 9 and still work, get maintained etc.

Doing web dev in .NET nowadays for me is mostly creating HTTP/JSON/REST APIs and using whatever FE framework you like to interface it (for me that is React or NextJS). The keyword you want to search for is "ASP.NET WebApi" or - more modern - "ASP.NET minimal API".

You could still do .NET MVC server-side rendering using "Razor" (the markup language in ASP.NET MVC - search for "ASP.NET MVC Razor".

replies(4): >>41879547 #>>41882023 #>>41882374 #>>41883629 #
WorldMaker ◴[] No.41879547[source]
Blazor for better and worse can't have the same ending as Silverlight did. In Server Mode it is just Razor + SignalR for HTMX-style frontends that sort of live update/"magic RPC". In Client Mode it is just Razor as a virtual DOM-ish framework running directly in Web Assembly (wasm) in the Browser. At the end of the day Client Blazor is much more like writing front end websites with Elm than writing websites for the Silverlight plugin.

(Hybrid Blazor where you use both server and client possibly in the exact same assembly/project is where most of the worst Blazor mistakes lie, but those aren't the mistakes of Silverlight, those are the mistakes of ASP Classic before .NET where you can be easily confused by new versions of the which bit of this is `runat="server"` and which bit is `runat="client"` and easily and accidentally create wild RPC ravioli/spaghetti code.)

replies(1): >>41879816 #
hakanderyal ◴[] No.41879816[source]
Do you know of any performant, quality examples of Blazor out in the wild? All the examples I've seen have unacceptable UX by modern standards.
replies(3): >>41880226 #>>41880506 #>>41880871 #
parineum ◴[] No.41880506[source]
> All the examples I've seen have unacceptable UX by modern standards.

What does that have to do with Blazor?

One could easily write outdated UX in React if they so choose.

replies(1): >>41880577 #
hakanderyal ◴[] No.41880577[source]
It's the slowness/sluggishness, not the looks. Most of the time even a simple interaction like clicking a checkbox takes ~1-2 seconds, which probably comes from tracking the state on server.

(I don't mind outdated for .NET stuff, nearly everything from enterprise vendors looks like it just jumped out of WinXP anyway.)

replies(2): >>41880907 #>>41883643 #
1. aksss ◴[] No.41883643{4}[source]
> 1-2 seconds

Something is wrong there, probably someone is screwing up form validation in their component framework or something, but IME that’s not a Blazor thing.