dotnet-script VS CoreWCF

Especially because these languages are only one package/install away and not two. I don‘t really get for which audience is targeted here. Usage in JS projects maybe, but then why not write it as npm tasks. ..

I‘m playing around with dotnet-scripts [1] at the moment (C# shop mainly) and this has the same issue imho. The reason why I looked into it was because we have developers not accustomed to bash etc. I still find it silly and would rather use ruby so…

[1] https://github.com/dotnet-script/dotnet-script

>making powershell actually enjoyable to use

My solution was to stop using it and instead use dotnet-script

https://github.com/dotnet-script/dotnet-script

Scripting with the full power of modern C# has been a huge win for me. And same/similar scripts will work on Windows/Linux/Mac. As my work language is C#, I don't have to context switch to another language for scripting.

I usually create a container that has all database migrations and tool to execute those migrations. I name migrations as [yyyyMMdd-HHmm-migration-name.sql] but please feel free to use any naming scheme, keep in mind how the tool would order multiple files to run those migrations. I have also added a wait-for-db.csx file that I would use as the entry point for database migrations container. This is a dotnet-script file and would be run using dotnet-script. I have pinned the versions that are compatible with .net sdk 3.1 as this the version roundhouse is build against at the time of writing.

thanks, this is very good idea too, and with dotnet-script we can publish executable out of the script!

It sounds like this is feedback for the author of the dotnet script tool: https://github.com/dotnet-script/dotnet-script

Yes, you can have single-file scripts too. There might be more options to achieve this, but the one that I use is running *.csx files via the dotnet-script (https://github.com/dotnet-script/dotnet-script).

I do agree.

I think .Net has got it right. And dotnet-script [https://github.com/dotnet-script/dotnet-script] has been a game-changer for me with a REPL-like experience for unit testing and writing command-line utilities.

CoreWCF might be of some use.

You can open a discussion in the CoreWCF repo:

In the later versions you could avoid almost all the XML mess by configuring all of the settings in code. The experience is pretty close to gRPC imo, one plus point is you don't need to learn how to write proto classes. Though you could use protobuf-net for a similar experience. I'm kinda hopeful with CoreWCF, they aim to support more transports (including event gRPC) in the future along with queues other than MSMQ and slowly evolve from being too SOAP specific. There's a lot of potential still for WCF to be a transport agnostic framework that ecompass a lot of transports.

On our end, it's WCF for some servers that haven't been upgraded over. Though it seems we have a path forward for that now with CoreWCF that we're working towards.

There's ongoing work on adding generic queue support. The first two concrete implementations should be MSMQ and RabbitMq from what I recall, though MSMQ will be windows only. But the nice thing about the work is it also opens up other types of message queues for WCF (e.g. Azure Service Bus, RabbitMq, Amazon SQS etc...).

It's seems there's already design work started for a generic queue concept here. I'm pretty interested to see how it goes as well as that'll be a big part for CoreWcf to move forward as a viable choice for greenfield projects and not just a way to migrate existing Wcf projects to Core.

The ongoing .net core port called CoreWcf plans to realize that goal as a future feature on it's roadmap. Where there's plans on adding new transports that didn't exist on .net framework wcf like Grpc, Azure Service bus, Amazon SQS, rabbitmq etc...

If you hit any difficulties or have any problems, feel free to jump on the gitter channel. Details for that are in the repo contributing guide.