←back to thread

Memory Safety in C# vs. Rust

13 points northlondoner | 1 comments | 16 Dec 25 12:55 UTC | HN request time: 0.202s | source

Noticed how C# is underrated. About memory safety in C#. How difficult to introduce multi-paradigm memory safety approach like Rust? Ownership model for example, would it be possible to enforce practice via some-sort of meta framework?
Show context
worldsavior ◴[16 Dec 25 14:36 UTC] No.46289021[source]▶
C# is underrated because it only works well on Windows and has bad frameworks such as .NET.

There isn't really any reason to use it outside of developing Windows native applications. There are much better cross-platform languages, with a bigger community and better support.

replies(3): >>46289202 #>>46290044 #>>46290367 #
jasonthorsness ◴[16 Dec 25 16:13 UTC] No.46290367[source]▶
This isn't true at all anymore for years! Microsoft acknowledged Linux won for server-side and since C# is primarily used as a server-side language they made everything work incredibly well on Linux.
replies(1): >>46290440 #
runjake ◴[16 Dec 25 16:18 UTC] No.46290440[source]▶
I find that modern versions of dotnet seem to run better on Linux. And from what I see from Azure and from MSFT engineer blog posts, I'm assuming dotnet support on Linux is a higher priority than on Windows.

In any case, their claim that dotnet is a bad framework made me chuckle out loud. I'd like to see their impression of what a better framework looks like.

replies(1): >>46293533 #
1. QuiCasseRien ◴[16 Dec 25 19:53 UTC] No.46293533[source]▶
I have the same result : performances on Linux are better and this is a real focus for MSFT engineer (Azure has a tons of linux instances running dotnet)