fslang-suggestions VS ASP.NET Core

Trying to extend this https://github.com/fsharp/fslang-suggestions/issues/1089 to have two generics:

Basically, what I've made in Spiral. There is even a F# issue to improve the syntax.

Not currently supported but it's an open language suggestion that's likely to end up in F#. https://github.com/fsharp/fslang-suggestions/issues/506

Re: the argument accessor shorthand, there seems to be a proposal for exactly that (using _ instead of &): https://github.com/fsharp/fslang-suggestions/issues/506#issu...

I found this post (https://github.com/fsharp/fslang-suggestions/issues/975) which is about the same thing, but I'm confused as to what the final resolution was. There was mention of a taskSeq, but I can't find much info on that.

An issue in FSharp suggestions

F# doesn’t currently seem to support source generators.

"Blessed" literals: only FSharp.List and System.Array have a built-in collection syntax in the language ([ ] and [| |]). Only FSharp.List has a special pattern matching constructor (::). The language itself shouldn't favor a particular type over another: it should be possible, at the library level, to write the same code but using different collection types (related discussion here).

I mostly write F# so I can only speak for F#, but if you want you can create a module which extends Seq to add the OCaml names. I suspect the same is possible in OCaml. The authors are not trying to impede compatibility, but compatibility is not a goal. If you value compatibility, or adhering to ML norms, and you use F#, I recommend you (kindly) advocate for it in relevant issues on the F# language discussion repo. https://github.com/fsharp/fslang-suggestions/issues

> Just .GetAwaiter().GetResult() it.

That won’t work with various synchronization contexts, where doing this would cause a deadlock. There’s not much fun in trying to debug such issues.

And now that various libraries only provide async api, or worse an non-async version wrapping the async one with . GetAwaiter().GetResult(), you’ll be in for a treat updating your dependencies.

Async all the way is the answer, although various frameworks still don’t offer async hooks. Recently I ran into this for example trying to write an async validator in blazor, but that’s not possible and you have to work around it [1].

C# 5 introduced async/await almost 12 years ago. And we’re still not “async all the way”.

[1]: https://github.com/dotnet/aspnetcore/issues/40244

This approach to organizing middleware enhances code readability, maintainability, and reusability. By following this encapsulation pattern, you're adhering to best practices in ASP.NET Core development, ensuring your application remains well-organized and scalable.

🌟.NET 9 Preview 2 ➡️.NET 9 Preview 2 Discussion ➡️ASP.NET Core updates in .NET 9 Preview 2 ➡️ASP.NET Core updates in .NET 9 Preview 2 Release Notes ➡️EF Core updates in .NET 9 Preview 2 ➡️.NET Aspire preview 4 - .NET Aspire

https://github.com/dotnet/aspnetcore/issues/50643

Even if you look at Microsoft’s by far most popular GitHub project, they’re still only half as big as SupaBase. If you believe “the SupaBase story”, SupaBase grew and became twice as large as Microsoft in 3 years. Below is their likes over time if you’re curious, together with a couple of additional “too good to be true” Silicon Valley projects.

https://github.com/dotnet/aspnetcore/issues/10117

To achieve these objectives, we will take inspiration from ASP.NET Core Identity's PasswordHasher class. It incorporates a concept of hash versioning, allowing only the number of iterations to be modified.

yes I watched several courses, may be aim not getting clearly. but i worked with asp.net which uses http call and firebase cloud function also which uses socket connection, for socket connection its makes sense to use observable bcoz there streams of data we can observe once the connection establish ,but for http it need to be call every time.