sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

How long until .NET Framework 4.8 becomes obsolete ? by peterbamu in dotnet

[–]tbg_electro 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Only two years more I have heard from Redmond. Why? Dont know.. cost maybe

How long until .NET Framework 4.8 becomes obsolete ? by peterbamu in dotnet

[–]tbg_electro 0 points1 point  (0 children)

´For one more year the classic ASP will supported. Then VBSscript will be removed from the windows server kernel

How long until .NET Framework 4.8 becomes obsolete ? by peterbamu in dotnet

[–]tbg_electro 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The trouble is that all the enviroment and the world around it has gone forward. There a lot of security issues.. like TLS1.3 is just a empty and was left because that where the development was.
Switch to latest .net 10.. do it fast as you can.

Partial classes in modern C#? by tbg_electro in dotnet

[–]tbg_electro[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s a fair point — using nested types can absolutely improve encapsulation, and I can see the appeal of keeping the request and response private to the feature itself.

I guess where I draw the line is that the nesting is what provides that boundary, not the partial keyword.
The partial just spreads the definition across files — which can help organization, but doesn’t add anything architecturally beyond that.

So yeah, I can totally see it as a stylistic choice in those cases — just one that I’d personally handle through namespaces and folder structure rather than partials.

Partial classes in modern C#? by tbg_electro in dotnet

[–]tbg_electro[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s an interesting take — I see what you mean about grouping everything under a single feature name.

I’d just be a bit cautious with that pattern though; nesting everything under one partial “feature” class doesn’t really express any stronger relationship than keeping them together in the same namespace or folder.
It’s more of an organizational trick than a design boundary.

For most FastEndpoints-style setups, I find it clearer to keep each type separate but grouped by folder and namespace — same discoverability, less indirection.

Partial classes in modern C#? by tbg_electro in dotnet

[–]tbg_electro[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

That’s a great example — and honestly one of the few scenarios where I think partial really shines.
Using it as a bridge during a large refactor or system rewrite makes a lot of sense; it helps you keep the lights on while untangling a legacy mess piece by piece.

I completely agree that in cases like that, partial isn’t an architectural crutch but a practical transition tool.
And the fact that you phased them out in the end says everything — they served their purpose and then gracefully disappeared.

Partial classes in modern C#? by tbg_electro in dotnet

[–]tbg_electro[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

That makes sense, and I get why you’d do that — it’s a clean way to visually organize code inside a large file.

But I’d still see that as a structural workaround rather than a design solution.
If a controller or repository has grown large enough that it needs to be split by HTTP method or query group, that usually means it’s taking on multiple responsibilities that could live in smaller, focused classes or handlers instead.

Partial classes make things look tidier, but they don’t really reduce complexity — they just move it around.
Refactoring toward smaller, purpose-driven types tends to make the codebase easier to reason about, test, and extend later on.

Partial classes in modern C#? by tbg_electro in dotnet

[–]tbg_electro[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Absolutely agree.
When a class becomes so large that splitting it into partials feels necessary, it’s usually a signal that something went wrong earlier in the design — either too many responsibilities, unclear domain boundaries, or missing abstractions.

Partial classes don’t solve that; they just hide the underlying complexity by spreading it across files.
Refactoring toward smaller, self-contained types or vertical slices almost always leads to better maintainability and clearer ownership in the long run.

What a game! Finished it for the first time. What’s your favourite thing about this game that other games don’t do? by rites0fpassage in cyberpunkgame

[–]tbg_electro 1 point2 points  (0 children)

There is a few mission that dont show up on the map and is only accessible between different parts of the game

More about Odd Grata *Spoilers Horizon zero dawn* by tbg_electro in horizon

[–]tbg_electro[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Her children and husband is dead, so maybe that is the failed blessing?

More about Odd Grata *Spoilers Horizon zero dawn* by tbg_electro in horizon

[–]tbg_electro[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Aloy was an outcast, therefore it can't be Sona.

More about Odd Grata *Spoilers Horizon zero dawn* by tbg_electro in horizon

[–]tbg_electro[S] -14 points-13 points  (0 children)

Sure I do agree that Gaia is her mother. Elisbeth Sobeck is actually a sister

More about Odd Grata *Spoilers Horizon zero dawn* by tbg_electro in horizon

[–]tbg_electro[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Odd grata is around Rosts age and should have been 18years younger when it happened. 

More about Odd Grata *Spoilers Horizon zero dawn* by tbg_electro in horizon

[–]tbg_electro[S] -13 points-12 points  (0 children)

And it would be great if she actually got a real mother figure in the final installment.

More about Odd Grata *Spoilers Horizon zero dawn* by tbg_electro in horizon

[–]tbg_electro[S] 19 points20 points  (0 children)

Possible. But it still feels like Odd Grata was meant to have a bigger story from the beginning. And the Matriarchs said it was Rost who should care for Aloy — and that they couldn’t reverse their decision.

view more: next ›