[xpressvideoz]

> side note: sad that .NET and C# are not considered "major"...

Even Microsoft does not use C# for their new projects. See the new TypeScript compiler that is being rewritten in Go. So I think it is safe to say C# is indeed a minor language.

[CharlieDigital]

    > So I think it is safe to say C# is indeed a minor language

That's not really the case; StackOverflow survey[0] shows C# (27.1%) right behind Java (30.3%) and well ahead of Go (13.5%), Rust (12.6%), Kotlin (9.4%), Ruby (5.2%), and Scala (2.6%). If we exclude HTML/CSS, Bash/Shell, and SQL, C# would be #5 in actual languages used over the past year by devs in this survey.

You get the same result from scraping job postings: https://www.devjobsscanner.com/blog/top-8-most-demanded-prog...

    1. JS/TS (note these two are collapsed)
    2. Python
    3. Java
    4. C#

Two completely separate sources with the same output...

    > See the new TypeScript compiler that is being rewritten in Go

If they had started from scratch, Anders mentioned the considerations would be different. But because they had an existing body of code that was not class based, it would be more of a re-write (C#) versus a refactor (Go). A lot of folks read the headline without actually reading Anders' comments and reasoning.

C# is good for many things -- in particular application backends, game engines (both Godot and Unity) -- and not optimal for other things -- like serverless functions. Each language has a place and Go and Python are certainly better for CLI tools, for example.

[0] https://survey.stackoverflow.co/2024/technology

[bheadmaster]

> StackOverflow survey[0] shows C# (27.1%) right behind Java (30.3%)

Can we rule out sample bias here? After all, Jon Skeet [0] is an important part of the Stack Overflow's C# community.

It might just be the case that C# and Java developers use Stack Overflow more than users of other languages.

[0] https://toggl.com/blog/save-princess-8-programming-languages

[Teckla]

But because they had an existing body of code that was not class based, it would be more of a re-write (C#) versus a refactor (Go).

I don't understand this reasoning at all, and I'm hoping you can shed some light on it.

As far as I know, C# supports static methods. Thus, using OO in C# would not have been required, would it?

I feel like I'm missing something here.

[briandear]

I’ve never filled out a stack overflow survey. I wouldn’t say Stack Overflow is statistically representative what’s being used — it’s statistically representative of people that use Stack Overlow. 10 years ago SO was my go-to. Now, I barely notice it — it seems very outdated in many respects.

[0x457]

I never understood SO as a measurement tool for anything, but people that can't read docs.

[jabart]

The interviews with the Typescript dev doing the rewrite will tell you why. Switching their compiler to Go was a quick transition since Go matched their current JS build. The dev also wanted to use go, and use functional programming. It would have required more work to switch from functional to OOP style that C# has. Dev also didn't want to learn F#. Nothing about C#, just a personal decision with the least amount of work to get to a beta.

[int_19h]

FWIW the "functional programming" angle here is misconstrued - C# has better facilities for it than Go.

The thing that they actually wanted is data-centric programming with structural types.

[kevinmershon]

It's pretty true from recent experience. I've recently started rewriting a C# based desktop/window stream tool because of how weak the support is across the board for C#. Microsoft abandoned WinRTC, Sipsorcery is one guy and is missing VP9 HEVC and AV1 support. And for fancier stuff like using computer shaders for color space conversion, SharpDX is constantly referenced by chatgpt and MS docs, yet it's archived and unmaintained as well. I ended up using media streams VideoFrame class but it and two other classes required to interact with it have unpreventable thread and memory leaks built into the WinRT implementations themselves 4+ years ago. Good times.

All of the above was easy to implement in Rust

[kragen]

This is an interesting point I hadn't thought of when I saw the announcement of the new TypeScript compiler. It might be overstating the case to say that C# is indeed a minor language, but it's thought-provoking that it wasn't Microsoft's automatic choice here, the way it is for some all-Microsoft in-house IT shops.

[CharlieDigital]

Microsoft themselves ship on a variety of platforms.

It's more about right tool for the right job.

Good example is Azure CLI; it's Python. Microsoft is also a big contributor in the Python scene[0]

I don't think it's surprising at all that they didn't use C# to write a compiler for TS.

They have internal champions for Rust[1]

I'd say Microsoft is possibly one of the most diverse shops when it comes to tech selection.

[0] https://devblogs.microsoft.com/python/supporting-the-python-...

[1] https://www.theregister.com/2022/09/20/rust_microsoft_c/

[int_19h]

TypeScript guys have a FAQ and even a video explaining why they chose Go exactly, and why not C# (or Rust, or other things). They had their reasons.

[troupo]

It's not thought-provoking if you care to spend 5 minutes and read/listen to the reasons they provided.

[jayd16]

Go folks are going to be holding up this Typescript decision for years, aren't they...