1 00:00:01,080 --> 00:00:05,679 How'd you like to listen to dot NetRocks with no ads? Easy? Become 2 00:00:05,679 --> 00:00:09,839 a patron For just five dollars a month, you get access to a private 3 00:00:10,000 --> 00:00:14,439 RSS feed where all the shows have no ads. Twenty dollars a month will 4 00:00:14,439 --> 00:00:19,039 get you that and a special dot NetRocks patron mug. Sign up now at 5 00:00:19,039 --> 00:00:23,800 Patreon dot dot NetRocks dot com. Hey, Carl and Richard here with your 6 00:00:23,920 --> 00:00:28,800 twenty twenty four NDC schedule. Will be at as many NDC conferences as possible 7 00:00:28,800 --> 00:00:33,280 this year, and you should consider attending no matter what. Ndcoslow is happening 8 00:00:33,439 --> 00:00:38,560 June tenth through the fourteenth. Get your tickets at ndcoslow dot com. The 9 00:00:38,600 --> 00:00:43,640 Copenhagen Developers Festival happens August twenty sixth through the thirtieth. Early bird discount ends 10 00:00:43,679 --> 00:00:51,479 April twenty sixth. Tickets at Cphdevfest dot com. Ndcporto is happening October fourteenth 11 00:00:51,560 --> 00:00:57,799 through the eighteenth. The early bird discount ends June fourteenth. Tickets at Ndcporto 12 00:00:57,920 --> 00:01:14,200 dot com. And we'll see you there, we hope. Hey, guess 13 00:01:14,200 --> 00:01:18,159 what it's dot net rocks and guess where in Seattle that build? I'm Carl 14 00:01:18,200 --> 00:01:21,079 Franklin. I'm Richard Gamble, and while we're here with a couple of C 15 00:01:21,280 --> 00:01:27,280 Sharp legends, but we are in a podcast booth with some fabric walls, 16 00:01:27,519 --> 00:01:30,760 no ceiling, and a whole bunch of other podcasters. Yeah, a few 17 00:01:30,760 --> 00:01:34,840 other shows going at the moment that we're recording. Amanda Silvers in one room 18 00:01:36,000 --> 00:01:38,640 and Marc Siavich is in another room. So it's quite an all star back 19 00:01:38,719 --> 00:01:44,159 cast. And by room we mean polls with fabric stretched around. Yeah, 20 00:01:44,159 --> 00:01:47,840 but we'll see what these headsets are good, So hopefully they cross talk is 21 00:01:47,879 --> 00:01:49,319 not too bad. Yeah, hopefully. I mean, it feels like I'm 22 00:01:49,359 --> 00:01:53,840 landing a plane. Well it's really belt for like the NFL. Yeah, 23 00:01:53,959 --> 00:01:59,400 so you feel like you're planning a kickoff. So I'll be color here. 24 00:01:59,680 --> 00:02:02,319 Can they do the play by play? All right? He's at the thirty, 25 00:02:02,680 --> 00:02:06,599 he's at the forty. Yeah, he's stopping him now, Bob. 26 00:02:06,959 --> 00:02:10,800 Last time I said this was in nineteen seventy four and the World Series against 27 00:02:10,800 --> 00:02:14,639 it. I know who I'm talking about. All Right, anyway, let's 28 00:02:14,639 --> 00:02:24,360 get started with better know a framework. Awesome, alight, man, what 29 00:02:24,400 --> 00:02:29,039 do you got? I found this cool thing called Terminal dot Gooey. What 30 00:02:29,159 --> 00:02:34,800 is terminal Terminal dot Gooey is a toolkit for building rich console apps for dot 31 00:02:34,879 --> 00:02:38,120 net, dot net core and mono that works on Windows, the Mac, 32 00:02:38,719 --> 00:02:44,560 and Linux or Unix. How about that? And by you know, it 33 00:02:44,599 --> 00:02:47,960 looks just like you know, Norton Utilities from nineteen eighty three, oh man, 34 00:02:49,199 --> 00:02:52,800 like the demo does, but it also has like Google asci art graphics 35 00:02:52,800 --> 00:02:55,639 and things. It's really cool. So super old school though, that's awesome, 36 00:02:55,759 --> 00:02:59,280 very old school. Well, you know that I think these things are 37 00:02:59,280 --> 00:03:00,919 coming back, you know, yeah, they have been coming back for a 38 00:03:00,960 --> 00:03:05,439 while. Everybody likes a command line, but yeah, if you can do 39 00:03:05,479 --> 00:03:07,360 a text based gooey, then it's not as obnoxious as a mouse based guey. 40 00:03:07,439 --> 00:03:09,759 I guess I suppose so. I mean, I kind of think that 41 00:03:09,879 --> 00:03:14,520 these are more retro toys for people. Our age that you know, grew 42 00:03:15,120 --> 00:03:17,240 make you feel better call you know when his command line would call ourselves a 43 00:03:17,280 --> 00:03:22,240 green screen. You know, honestly, I remember when I got rid of 44 00:03:22,280 --> 00:03:28,039 my Hercule Lee's graphics card and the world was all caller yeah in other top 45 00:03:28,120 --> 00:03:32,960 days and cga c ga yeah, and g e ga e ga and hands 46 00:03:34,000 --> 00:03:37,719 graphics adapter. Welcome to some old guys talk about old things that don't matter 47 00:03:37,719 --> 00:03:39,520 anymore. There you go, all right? Anyway, that's what I got. 48 00:03:39,560 --> 00:03:44,120 Tonald Duck Gooey and who's talking to us today? Drafted comment off a 49 00:03:44,159 --> 00:03:46,960 show eighteen ninety eight, not that long ago. This is the one we 50 00:03:46,000 --> 00:03:51,520 did with Sean Wildermouth back in May, because we're publishing this in June, 51 00:03:52,319 --> 00:03:54,599 talking about being a senior software developer. Yeah, we kind of went back 52 00:03:54,639 --> 00:03:58,680 and forth on this show because we did we have not a soft skills show 53 00:03:58,719 --> 00:04:00,479 in a long time, and we weren't sure how this is going to come 54 00:04:00,479 --> 00:04:03,960 out. But boy, we got a really strong reaction. And Sean wasn't 55 00:04:04,000 --> 00:04:08,560 really sure. He pushed her too, right, He like, have I 56 00:04:08,560 --> 00:04:11,199 ever done the right thing here? And it's like, let's see what the 57 00:04:11,199 --> 00:04:14,199 listeners think, and the listeners seem I think we resonated with certain folks, 58 00:04:14,240 --> 00:04:19,480 and one of them here is Rob Schroeder, who said, as a senior 59 00:04:19,519 --> 00:04:23,480 dev who just ticked over into his fifties, this episode came at the right 60 00:04:23,519 --> 00:04:28,000 time. It's good to hear that Shawn's experience in struggles mirror mine. Also, 61 00:04:28,839 --> 00:04:31,439 I struggle to know where my career should go. Management hold zero appeal 62 00:04:31,519 --> 00:04:35,160 to me. So I've been sort of peaked at the lead engineer level a 63 00:04:35,279 --> 00:04:39,279 kid go into training. But despite thirty years under my belt, I still 64 00:04:39,279 --> 00:04:43,240 feel like I don't know enough. Isn't that funny? And that's totally inside 65 00:04:43,240 --> 00:04:46,040 of you, Rob, Like you know far more than you realize. If 66 00:04:46,040 --> 00:04:48,959 you actually sit down and make a plan to teach people, you'll know what 67 00:04:49,079 --> 00:04:53,839 to do. You know far more than you realize. What I still have 68 00:04:53,879 --> 00:04:56,480 going for me is a willingness to learn new things and demonstrate how they could 69 00:04:56,480 --> 00:05:00,480 be useful. Maybe if that goes, I will reevaluate the Yeah, if 70 00:05:00,519 --> 00:05:03,079 you stop caring, then it's time to move on. As long as you 71 00:05:03,160 --> 00:05:06,199 care, it's great. So Rob, thank you so much for your comment. 72 00:05:06,240 --> 00:05:09,199 To copy music Coby is on its way to you, and if you'd 73 00:05:09,240 --> 00:05:11,560 like a copy of music Koba, I write a comment on the website at 74 00:05:11,560 --> 00:05:14,560 dot at Rocks dot com or on the Facebook so we publish every show there 75 00:05:14,720 --> 00:05:15,879 and if you comment there and I read it in the show, we'll send 76 00:05:15,879 --> 00:05:19,519 you copy music Go buy. You could also send us an X. It 77 00:05:19,680 --> 00:05:23,680 just doesn't sound right, No, that's wrong. Let's just send me an 78 00:05:23,839 --> 00:05:25,959 X. What does that mean? A kiss or huck? I can't remember 79 00:05:26,160 --> 00:05:29,519 on the switch Send us a tweet. Of course, we've been on Twitter 80 00:05:29,560 --> 00:05:32,800 forever, but you can also follow us on masdon where the cool kids are 81 00:05:32,839 --> 00:05:36,199 hanging out. I'm at Carl Franklin at tech Hub dot social, and I'm 82 00:05:36,279 --> 00:05:40,240 Rich Campbell at Mastered on dot social. Send us a two. That's another 83 00:05:40,240 --> 00:05:43,959 way that you can get a copy of music to code buy. Here you 84 00:05:44,000 --> 00:05:46,720 go. So let's bring on our guests. They've been on the show before. 85 00:05:46,879 --> 00:05:50,560 They've been on many shows of their own talking about c sharp. Every 86 00:05:50,560 --> 00:05:55,519 time there's a new C sharp version. You'll see them online doing videos. 87 00:05:55,879 --> 00:06:00,800 It's Mad's Torgerson and Dustin Campbell. Let me read their bios. Mads Targusen 88 00:06:00,879 --> 00:06:03,759 is the architec for the C sharp language at Microsoft and runs the C sharp 89 00:06:03,839 --> 00:06:08,759 design meetings and Prior to joining Microsoft in two thousand and five, he was 90 00:06:08,800 --> 00:06:15,600 an associate professor at University of RHUs and doing programming language research YEP and Dustin 91 00:06:15,639 --> 00:06:19,560 Campbell is a principal software engineer on the dot Net Developer Experience Team, where 92 00:06:19,560 --> 00:06:25,199 he currently works on the Razor C sharp and Visual Basic language experiences for visual 93 00:06:25,199 --> 00:06:30,680 Studio. Passionate about coding productivity, Dustin's primary focus is on making dot net 94 00:06:30,720 --> 00:06:33,480 tooling great and helping design the next version of c sharp. Is part of 95 00:06:33,480 --> 00:06:38,439 the language design team. Prior to his current role, he spent several years 96 00:06:38,439 --> 00:06:42,759 working as a program manager in the project called Rosalin maybe you've heard of it, 97 00:06:43,279 --> 00:06:47,120 designing the next generation of the c sharp and VBID experiences. Dustin is 98 00:06:47,160 --> 00:06:53,360 a programming nut. His favorite color is blue. Welcome back, guys. 99 00:06:53,480 --> 00:06:56,040 Is any of that true? Some of that's true, Some of it is 100 00:06:56,040 --> 00:06:59,439 true. What a luxury that we get to be sit together rather than the 101 00:06:59,560 --> 00:07:02,680 usual of remote thing. Yeah, it's fun to be together and chat a 102 00:07:02,720 --> 00:07:08,639 bit. This we we just went through the keynote of Build and it's all 103 00:07:08,639 --> 00:07:12,879 copilot all the time. It's a a I like, where where's the pro 104 00:07:13,000 --> 00:07:15,839 You guys have got to talk? What are you talking about? We're talking 105 00:07:15,879 --> 00:07:19,800 about programming? Good, because that's a good thing of a bill to talk 106 00:07:19,800 --> 00:07:26,120 about programming. Yeah, I mean, don't get me wrong. AI Copilot 107 00:07:26,199 --> 00:07:30,160 it is really important. It's really taking off and it's getting into everything. 108 00:07:30,279 --> 00:07:35,959 It is getting into the coding experience. Should you copilot like first people first 109 00:07:36,519 --> 00:07:41,519 met copilot as part of a developer experience. That's where that kind of that's 110 00:07:41,519 --> 00:07:44,959 what that's why so good Microsoft had come up with it was GitHub. Yeah, 111 00:07:45,560 --> 00:07:50,399 well get hub. You know it's owned subsidiary, so we'll take that, 112 00:07:50,439 --> 00:07:57,160 thank you very much. Yeah, but but it is really impacting the 113 00:07:57,319 --> 00:08:01,480 developer experience very much, right, I use getthub copile internally. We were 114 00:08:01,720 --> 00:08:05,519 we were in fact just using it. We were working on our talk and 115 00:08:05,600 --> 00:08:07,639 it was filling in stuff for us, just the small things as we're and 116 00:08:07,680 --> 00:08:11,439 it was actually you know, just filling out the boilerplate as we were writing 117 00:08:11,519 --> 00:08:16,560 up demos. And I love that. Yeah, even on crazy brand new 118 00:08:16,639 --> 00:08:20,600 sea sharp bits that nobody's seen yet. It was like, so when you 119 00:08:20,600 --> 00:08:22,720 guys are working on like I mean, you're working on dot at nine right 120 00:08:22,759 --> 00:08:26,920 now, so sharp thirteen, Yeah at thirteen, lucky number thirteen. Man. 121 00:08:28,160 --> 00:08:33,840 Yeah, So the way that copilot works, it can actually understand the 122 00:08:33,919 --> 00:08:37,080 new language features and you can see how it interacts with like that's almost a 123 00:08:37,120 --> 00:08:41,480 way to look at how that feature surfaces, because it isn't a trained on 124 00:08:41,559 --> 00:08:45,159 your reposts, I mean your personal repost like I can comment, you know, 125 00:08:45,279 --> 00:08:48,480 list all of the connection strings that Matt's has put in his reposts, 126 00:08:48,519 --> 00:08:54,120 and yeah, Matt Matt's posts all of his passwords. One that's how you 127 00:08:54,240 --> 00:08:58,960 know works. You got to do it yourself and right a four loop to 128 00:08:58,000 --> 00:09:05,840 print them out. There's a language feature for you. I mean, that's 129 00:09:05,840 --> 00:09:09,360 been one of the interesting challenges for AI to get up to speed, right, 130 00:09:09,440 --> 00:09:13,759 because the older the version of the language, the more code is already 131 00:09:13,799 --> 00:09:18,559 out there in it new things. And that's some something we've gotten a lot 132 00:09:18,600 --> 00:09:20,720 better at. Yeah, and I think there's a long ways to go, 133 00:09:20,919 --> 00:09:28,080 too, right, because you know, the I guess the the best idea 134 00:09:28,159 --> 00:09:30,960 that we have is like, let's let's, you know, try and make 135 00:09:31,080 --> 00:09:35,279 the AI to produce code that is the latest and greatest, right, But 136 00:09:35,000 --> 00:09:37,960 what if that doesn't mean anything to you yet? Right, right, Like 137 00:09:39,080 --> 00:09:41,960 it introduces collection expressions, but you're still new in upper rays and C sharp 138 00:09:43,000 --> 00:09:48,200 one O syntax, you know. And so I I like the idea that, 139 00:09:48,519 --> 00:09:50,600 you know, if we can get AI to the place where it actually 140 00:09:50,679 --> 00:09:54,360 it's almost as if you asked it a question and responded in your own voice, 141 00:09:54,360 --> 00:09:58,600 where you just look at your code and produce code that is essentially look 142 00:09:58,639 --> 00:10:01,440 at it, and it's friction free. You're comfortable in C sharp seven. 143 00:10:01,600 --> 00:10:03,679 Yeah, so that's the code I'm going to spit out for you. Yeah. 144 00:10:03,720 --> 00:10:07,080 I know, I'm on C sharp nine, I'm on C sharp thirteen, 145 00:10:07,159 --> 00:10:09,360 whatever, whatever, But I haven't used any of those features yet, 146 00:10:09,360 --> 00:10:11,919 and I really don't know what that does. Yeah. So yeah, but 147 00:10:13,039 --> 00:10:16,039 this was a conversation we had ages ago about how were we going to manage 148 00:10:16,480 --> 00:10:18,879 the fact that you maintain backward compatibility so all that out code always runs, 149 00:10:18,960 --> 00:10:22,679 but still encourage people to use the new features. And you said tooling, 150 00:10:24,440 --> 00:10:28,200 and this looks like tooling like that, this is the tool that. Well, 151 00:10:28,240 --> 00:10:30,200 I'll spit you out your CE sharp seven. I'll say, hey, 152 00:10:30,200 --> 00:10:31,919 would you let us see what this looks like in thirteen because you can do 153 00:10:33,000 --> 00:10:37,759 it this way and it's maybe a little terser, a little clearer. You 154 00:10:37,840 --> 00:10:41,000 know. All of those things seem to me to be really compelling for developers 155 00:10:41,080 --> 00:10:43,480 to say, this still runs, but you could have it this way instead 156 00:10:43,960 --> 00:10:46,360 and lead them to the path of using the new features. Yes, and 157 00:10:46,480 --> 00:10:50,279 we do that often already, even without the use of copilot, without a 158 00:10:52,240 --> 00:10:54,159 yeah, you just have has a lot of that coded in right. Yeah, 159 00:10:54,360 --> 00:11:01,600 And the interesting is that how that interplay evolved between what co pilot feels 160 00:11:01,759 --> 00:11:07,879 like suggesting based on it's on the model that it's right referring to virtually on 161 00:11:07,000 --> 00:11:13,159 probability, yes, versus the deterministic but sort of needs to be hand rolled 162 00:11:13,200 --> 00:11:18,080 a little more. Things that we also have built in sort of intelli sense 163 00:11:18,120 --> 00:11:22,279 and telecode type technology, code fixes that suggest using new features and that kind 164 00:11:22,279 --> 00:11:24,279 of thing. Yeah, I can tell you from experience that when I ask 165 00:11:24,399 --> 00:11:28,120 chat GPT to write me a console app that does X, it creates a 166 00:11:28,200 --> 00:11:31,679 main and a you know, a submain in the program and all that stuff, 167 00:11:33,000 --> 00:11:37,320 whereas you guys have completely simplified that and yeah, so really even a 168 00:11:37,320 --> 00:11:39,600 couple of versions ago. Yeah, it you know, it takes time to 169 00:11:39,639 --> 00:11:43,320 get that stuff trained on, you know, even to have code out there. 170 00:11:43,799 --> 00:11:48,000 Right, that's and that's that's that's writing that way or has best practices 171 00:11:48,279 --> 00:11:52,000 and all that kind of thing. That in the perspective of gethub copilot, 172 00:11:52,039 --> 00:11:54,519 where it's parsing public repositories, it's not only that you have to put the 173 00:11:54,600 --> 00:11:58,879 feature out there so that somebody has to code against it enough times that it 174 00:12:00,159 --> 00:12:03,960 rises in probability is a correct answer for a large language model. Yes, 175 00:12:03,039 --> 00:12:05,879 so, and you said that you want it to be as natural as you 176 00:12:05,960 --> 00:12:11,840 know, talking to somebody who's very much like yourself. Is there going to 177 00:12:11,919 --> 00:12:13,639 be away soon or is there a way, you know, get hub co 178 00:12:13,799 --> 00:12:16,639 pilot to say, you know, this is the version of C sharp language 179 00:12:16,639 --> 00:12:20,279 that I want to use, and you should spit out everything like this. 180 00:12:20,080 --> 00:12:24,200 I even want it to be more like it's it, you know, hand 181 00:12:24,279 --> 00:12:28,080 in hand with some of the ID tooling that we have. If I can 182 00:12:28,159 --> 00:12:30,919 get of us more than text, more than just code, give us some 183 00:12:30,919 --> 00:12:33,399 semantics here, here's what I was trying to do. Yeah, And the 184 00:12:33,480 --> 00:12:35,120 idea is like, you know, I've got the whole project here, I 185 00:12:35,240 --> 00:12:39,039 know what's in there. Like they don't do that, but they do this, 186 00:12:39,679 --> 00:12:41,879 you know, and it might be c sharp ten, but they might 187 00:12:41,960 --> 00:12:46,440 be still using us. It might use a smattering of features and different things. 188 00:12:46,440 --> 00:12:48,080 All right, So you don't want to you don't want to have to 189 00:12:48,240 --> 00:12:50,559 tell the tool anything. It should read the code that's there and say, 190 00:12:50,879 --> 00:12:54,080 hey, this is how you write your code. Let me write code like 191 00:12:54,159 --> 00:12:56,600 this. Yes, yeah, absolutely, that's legit. Well you can say 192 00:12:56,639 --> 00:13:01,039 that, let the version of c sharp that using that your cs prog file. 193 00:13:01,279 --> 00:13:05,720 Right, But it's not there by default, right, not by default, 194 00:13:05,759 --> 00:13:09,399 it's the it's the latest by default, And that might not be what 195 00:13:09,639 --> 00:13:11,960 your program looks like. It also might be it might make a suggestion that 196 00:13:13,120 --> 00:13:16,120 looks completely different than the code you're looking at, and so then there's friction 197 00:13:16,200 --> 00:13:20,559 should I accept this suggestion or yeah, that kind of thing. So yeah, 198 00:13:20,559 --> 00:13:24,120 I'd love it to just get friction free, to just kind of no 199 00:13:24,679 --> 00:13:28,360 be able to speak in your language. Right. I've said this before that 200 00:13:28,559 --> 00:13:31,279 you know, there are people who are kind of hesitant to trust AI. 201 00:13:33,080 --> 00:13:37,519 But code is one of the places where it really shines because you can test 202 00:13:37,600 --> 00:13:39,360 it immediately. You know, it's not like it's giving you a fact that 203 00:13:39,480 --> 00:13:43,120 you are then going to regurgitate and you could look like a complete idiot or 204 00:13:43,600 --> 00:13:50,080 or worse right, you're getting some code and it runs or it doesn't run. 205 00:13:50,519 --> 00:13:52,879 The compiler has to say yeah, intelligence has to say yeah, of 206 00:13:52,919 --> 00:14:00,799 course. There's these things called tests that some people's talk those tests that an 207 00:14:00,840 --> 00:14:07,679 a I wrote for you first doing that, so I mean that's how they 208 00:14:07,759 --> 00:14:11,200 get you. Yeah, yeah, first that generated code that didn't work then 209 00:14:11,200 --> 00:14:15,519 I wrote test around it, so it passed anyway. But wouldn't it be 210 00:14:15,600 --> 00:14:18,480 great though, if we could have tests for everything that AI outputs, you 211 00:14:18,559 --> 00:14:22,159 know, just like everything that the large language model says. It's just it 212 00:14:22,240 --> 00:14:26,960 sooner or later you you actually have to use your brain and your eyes to 213 00:14:26,039 --> 00:14:28,399 look at it. Go is that a real test? Is that what we 214 00:14:28,519 --> 00:14:33,240 want to validate? M But then it begs the question that, well, 215 00:14:33,320 --> 00:14:35,919 if we need to be smarter than the AI, then what's the use of 216 00:14:37,000 --> 00:14:41,000 an AI? Just type save key strokes? Yeah, it's productivity. It 217 00:14:41,559 --> 00:14:43,080 saves time. Oh, I get it. It was a rhetorical question. 218 00:14:43,240 --> 00:14:46,919 I say, I actually, and I actually turn it off a lot of 219 00:14:46,960 --> 00:14:48,679 times. I have there's a button in the in visual studio where I can 220 00:14:48,720 --> 00:14:52,000 turn it on and off. And I turned off a lot of the time 221 00:14:52,039 --> 00:14:56,360 because when it makes a suggestion, I find my my my ADHD brain finds 222 00:14:56,399 --> 00:15:01,120 myself staring at that code and trying to under stand what it's doing as opposed 223 00:15:01,159 --> 00:15:03,200 to what I really wanted. Was like a blank slate, So I think 224 00:15:03,360 --> 00:15:07,720 and start filling it out to fund them A very interesting definition. It's like 225 00:15:09,000 --> 00:15:11,960 how many times do you want the blank slate versus the blank state is stopping 226 00:15:13,080 --> 00:15:16,480 you. You get to that blank screen like I don't know what to do, 227 00:15:16,480 --> 00:15:20,600 and describing it to the tool actually helps you know what to do. 228 00:15:20,879 --> 00:15:24,879 What I do is I ask four comments. I ask a comment every line 229 00:15:24,879 --> 00:15:28,399 of code, and they will do that to parse existing code. No, 230 00:15:28,480 --> 00:15:31,519 no, no, when you when you want it to, let's say, 231 00:15:31,600 --> 00:15:35,120 generate a method that does acts okay, and when in this generated code, 232 00:15:35,159 --> 00:15:37,720 I want you to comment everyone, tell me what you're doing, help you 233 00:15:37,799 --> 00:15:41,879 with parsing for understanding, and I'll do that. That's a great idea. 234 00:15:41,519 --> 00:15:50,480 I am pentameter, I like I am acceptameter. I want you to comment 235 00:15:50,519 --> 00:15:58,200 every line of code in rhyming couplets, write a sonnet. I know it's 236 00:15:58,320 --> 00:16:00,440 just a machine, but it feels a little cruel. Actually, yeah, 237 00:16:00,480 --> 00:16:03,559 I know. I know you want to say I'm sorry, but I'm sorry, 238 00:16:04,120 --> 00:16:07,480 thank you to write, thank you very much. I used the iamic 239 00:16:07,559 --> 00:16:14,000 Contemporary trip to to show people what overflowing the token buffer looked like, because 240 00:16:14,000 --> 00:16:15,159 it was the first thing I said is everything you should say to me is 241 00:16:15,159 --> 00:16:19,039 that I just keep asking it things and after a certain point when it overflowed, 242 00:16:19,039 --> 00:16:22,279 that would stroll off and suddenly we drop and so it was just like 243 00:16:22,480 --> 00:16:26,399 look this and here's this is also look what it said. It it got 244 00:16:26,480 --> 00:16:30,720 weird because it had a portion of a set of tokens. This is older 245 00:16:30,840 --> 00:16:34,000 versions stuff. But it was just like ways to remind people there's this is 246 00:16:34,200 --> 00:16:37,919 software and it's not intelligent. So should we talk about c sharp? Oh 247 00:16:38,080 --> 00:16:44,519 yeah, that's what what pardon there's this thing right now where every conversation degenerates 248 00:16:44,720 --> 00:16:51,679 in just went straight there. Yeah, regenerate from that. So at first 249 00:16:51,720 --> 00:16:52,200 to get it out of the way, move on. So what's new, 250 00:16:52,240 --> 00:16:56,679 pussy cat? Hmm, you're making a new language, a new version of 251 00:16:56,679 --> 00:16:59,360 the new version again. Yeah. Yeah, it happens every year. Now, 252 00:17:00,320 --> 00:17:03,720 is that good? Yes? Not everybody thinks. So. I do 253 00:17:04,039 --> 00:17:07,799 know that there's folks out there. We certainly get the emails of resolves like 254 00:17:07,119 --> 00:17:11,799 so fast, so fast. He did look at me when he said that 255 00:17:11,920 --> 00:17:17,359 too, Yes, I did, but it was not necessarily because it was 256 00:17:17,680 --> 00:17:22,240 not to imply that you had a different opinion. More, I think that 257 00:17:22,359 --> 00:17:25,839 the perception when when we come out every year, the perception of speed is 258 00:17:25,880 --> 00:17:30,160 certainly different, right because the number of times you have to well you feel 259 00:17:30,240 --> 00:17:33,599 you have to go and reorient yourself and figure out what's up now is you 260 00:17:33,680 --> 00:17:37,559 know, more frequent, But I mean the PM in me and I know 261 00:17:37,680 --> 00:17:41,440 that's a you know, out of style term, but the PM ME says 262 00:17:41,880 --> 00:17:45,920 are we're building features that can ship in a year because that's what we have 263 00:17:45,079 --> 00:17:51,839 for time. So that's that's one of the risks I feel that we're so 264 00:17:51,920 --> 00:17:57,039 I don't feel that the overall velocity of c Sharp's evolution is actually higher. 265 00:17:57,480 --> 00:18:03,279 I feel like we we ship deltas more often you get like the first down 266 00:18:03,359 --> 00:18:07,039 payment on a feature that immediately gives you value, and then the next round. 267 00:18:07,079 --> 00:18:11,640 So we did collection expressions for instance twelve. There'll be a few more 268 00:18:11,720 --> 00:18:15,000 things based on that in thirteen and in fourteen, maybe in fifteen. So 269 00:18:15,119 --> 00:18:18,480 at the end of all of that, you'll have the same amount of feature. 270 00:18:18,720 --> 00:18:22,039 It will just have come out in increments in increments. It is, 271 00:18:22,279 --> 00:18:26,279 And I also wonder if that helps people use it, because it's a small 272 00:18:26,319 --> 00:18:30,720 step in each version. It possibly helps some people. And what it does 273 00:18:30,839 --> 00:18:34,640 for us is it gives us feedback in between, so the feedback loop becomes 274 00:18:34,720 --> 00:18:37,880 more fine grained. A lot of people we're using the first part, and 275 00:18:37,960 --> 00:18:40,480 we're going to be like, oh, actually that direction we thought we were 276 00:18:40,519 --> 00:18:42,880 going to take it in, We're going to take it over the webstead Yeah, 277 00:18:44,200 --> 00:18:47,920 or between three possible things we could do with it next we'll find out 278 00:18:47,920 --> 00:18:51,319 which one is the most important based on the scenario. So the feature we 279 00:18:51,359 --> 00:18:52,720 did, that's kind of the poster show that was like C sharp nine, 280 00:18:52,799 --> 00:18:57,480 we started doing records and then continue doing records in C sharp ten, Yeah, 281 00:18:57,480 --> 00:19:00,680 and then continue doing records and C sharp them. But really it was 282 00:19:00,759 --> 00:19:03,000 kind of a you know, when we first did it, it was a 283 00:19:03,079 --> 00:19:07,599 question of like what did we need to do. What's the goal to make 284 00:19:07,599 --> 00:19:11,200 sure that our future selves were equipped in order to do the next things, 285 00:19:11,359 --> 00:19:14,839 whatever those might be, depending on what people really needed next. And you 286 00:19:14,880 --> 00:19:17,920 said that there were features that you may have started, like in C sharp 287 00:19:18,039 --> 00:19:21,839 nine that won't even come out until now. How many how many of those 288 00:19:21,960 --> 00:19:25,640 are there that took four or five years to Yeah, So that's to the 289 00:19:25,720 --> 00:19:30,880 other part of Richard's question is that we we try very hard not to limit 290 00:19:30,960 --> 00:19:37,960 ourselves to bite sized features, because we do need to do big revolutionary things 291 00:19:38,039 --> 00:19:41,759 in the language occasionally. Does that mean you pushed dark code out, like 292 00:19:41,920 --> 00:19:47,279 code that's now in the system but generally not available to the user. As 293 00:19:47,400 --> 00:19:49,519 if you're going that long on code, or does it stay in a brand, 294 00:19:49,599 --> 00:19:52,880 you can go for it later, it can go for a don release. 295 00:19:52,920 --> 00:19:56,960 It kind of depends, right. A good example is the generic math 296 00:19:56,240 --> 00:20:00,000 stuff that shipped a couple of releases ago now, right, but that actually 297 00:20:00,759 --> 00:20:06,519 shipped it is an experimental preview and like an SDK before that, because we 298 00:20:06,640 --> 00:20:10,240 needed a couple of releases to deal to get the run time support to do 299 00:20:10,400 --> 00:20:14,160 things like static abstract members on interfaces, which we did, which is a 300 00:20:14,200 --> 00:20:17,200 whole thing. Is that just time to interact with the other teams, It's 301 00:20:17,480 --> 00:20:19,480 it's it's it's bake right as well, to see if it's like okay, 302 00:20:19,599 --> 00:20:23,559 is this hanging together? Does this actually meet the scenario? Let's get let's 303 00:20:23,559 --> 00:20:26,079 get some people that are you know, kind of kind of front runners that 304 00:20:26,160 --> 00:20:32,000 want to really play with this to try it out, and but we still 305 00:20:32,039 --> 00:20:33,319 need to get it out there for them, and so we've shipped it as 306 00:20:33,599 --> 00:20:37,200 with an experimental flag, right. Yeah. I mean, because what you 307 00:20:37,279 --> 00:20:41,000 were describing with records is that you kept adding features to records over time that 308 00:20:41,119 --> 00:20:45,680 was more like it was always But it's interesting to say, like you knew 309 00:20:45,680 --> 00:20:48,200 where you wanted to go, or you thought you knew where you wanted to 310 00:20:48,279 --> 00:20:52,240 go, and then you decomposed it of the steps you could fit into the 311 00:20:52,319 --> 00:20:56,839 interval, and then at each interval the customer are pressed against it and maybe 312 00:20:56,960 --> 00:20:59,599 changed it for you. Yes, well, Rosalind was like that wasn't It 313 00:21:00,079 --> 00:21:03,920 took a few years to come in, so it was. And another example, 314 00:21:03,319 --> 00:21:07,640 maybe the most extreme example in the language is pattern matching, which came 315 00:21:07,720 --> 00:21:14,160 in and C sharp seven. Yeah, and it was the most basic of 316 00:21:14,240 --> 00:21:17,759 things when you look back on it, but it introduced the notion of patterns, 317 00:21:18,240 --> 00:21:22,880 and it unified switch statements and is expressions around this notion of patterns. 318 00:21:22,920 --> 00:21:27,279 It had like that core. Oh here's we're turning a page. Here's a 319 00:21:27,319 --> 00:21:30,839 whole new thing. But the new thing itself was kind of small. It 320 00:21:30,880 --> 00:21:34,119 could do type tests and compared to constants, that was pretty much it pretty 321 00:21:34,160 --> 00:21:40,000 much it. Yeah, But then from there we knew we had thought ahead 322 00:21:40,119 --> 00:21:42,559 enough that we knew we had syntactic headroom to keep adding, and then it 323 00:21:42,680 --> 00:21:47,160 was a question of rinse and repeat for release after release after release, we 324 00:21:47,200 --> 00:21:52,160 had various forms of recursive patterns and list patterns and conditional patterns and all those 325 00:21:52,200 --> 00:21:56,640 things that wasn't even the right order ranges and everything. Yeah, and it 326 00:21:56,839 --> 00:22:03,920 just sometimes doing it that way really helps, just helps the feature get right. 327 00:22:06,000 --> 00:22:08,839 You need to make sure that you think ahead enough that you haven't just 328 00:22:08,960 --> 00:22:12,079 designed yourself into a dead end, right that the direction you want to go 329 00:22:12,240 --> 00:22:15,359 now you can't go there right, right? But also, I mean how 330 00:22:15,440 --> 00:22:19,920 much of the feedback influence you along that path too. It certainly it influenced 331 00:22:21,000 --> 00:22:25,160 us both in terms of the couple of things we had thought about, which 332 00:22:25,279 --> 00:22:27,119 is the next important thing we should get to in terms of priority. I 333 00:22:27,559 --> 00:22:30,759 think you're doing it right if you push it out there and the thing they 334 00:22:30,839 --> 00:22:33,119 ask for is the next thing you were planning to build. Yeah, yeah, 335 00:22:33,160 --> 00:22:37,079 yeah. And then sometimes that's the thing we know that like, Okay, 336 00:22:37,200 --> 00:22:38,279 this is the first bug that's going to get filed in this future, 337 00:22:38,640 --> 00:22:42,240 right, we know that we know it's missing. And sometimes it's it's you 338 00:22:42,319 --> 00:22:48,400 know, getting that signal from the customer and also coupling that with whatever resources 339 00:22:48,440 --> 00:22:52,000 there are there's and so sometimes like, well we're not getting to that yet 340 00:22:52,119 --> 00:22:55,880 because the person's over here working on those, they're clearly the good person to 341 00:22:55,960 --> 00:22:57,119 go do that. Yeah. I think that's the thing that a lot of 342 00:22:57,160 --> 00:23:00,839 folks struggle with, this is the reality that programmers aren't widgets. You can't 343 00:23:00,920 --> 00:23:04,920 just plug them into any old thing. That there's definitely folks with minds well 344 00:23:06,000 --> 00:23:08,920 suited to particular problem spaces, like this feature will be better if we wait 345 00:23:10,039 --> 00:23:11,799 for that person to work on it. Yeah, they're passions to people. 346 00:23:12,359 --> 00:23:15,680 People get passionate about. Like when we did records, the last feature to 347 00:23:15,759 --> 00:23:21,160 go in I think was all the required members for properties, and that turned 348 00:23:21,160 --> 00:23:22,519 out to be somebody who's just like, I am super passionate about this. 349 00:23:22,960 --> 00:23:26,759 It is I feel that it's broken until we do this, And so they 350 00:23:26,839 --> 00:23:29,599 went after it and it happened, yeah, and made it more Robust's Yeah, 351 00:23:29,599 --> 00:23:33,000 accordingly, how much is discoverability a feature? Because I mean, you 352 00:23:33,039 --> 00:23:37,400 guys are always adding things. What you can do with link now could be 353 00:23:37,480 --> 00:23:40,319 a book. This thick. I mean, I got a foot between my 354 00:23:40,400 --> 00:23:45,759 hands and I guess what I'm asking is do you get customers that say, 355 00:23:47,119 --> 00:23:48,880 you know, it would be really great if ce Shark could do this, 356 00:23:48,119 --> 00:23:51,599 And the answer is oh yeah, just do this sea shark can do that? 357 00:23:51,839 --> 00:23:56,519 Do that? Yeah, that happens. And I mean there's discoverability just 358 00:23:56,599 --> 00:24:02,519 in terms of sort of documentary how do I find out? But then there's 359 00:24:02,519 --> 00:24:07,200 also then there's also literally like the discoverability feature of pressing dot and seeing what 360 00:24:07,359 --> 00:24:12,559 you get up, like a feature we're going to be showing at the at 361 00:24:12,960 --> 00:24:22,519 built here is about that as about actually adding discoverability to that of APIs as 362 00:24:23,039 --> 00:24:26,440 you know, as part of your programming experience. But there is the there 363 00:24:26,519 --> 00:24:30,039 is a question about we talked about before with AI, and the same goes 364 00:24:30,079 --> 00:24:36,200 for things like stacko, like sites that give you answers to how do I 365 00:24:36,319 --> 00:24:40,160 do this? They're lagging, right, They're like right, they'll give you 366 00:24:41,279 --> 00:24:48,680 yesterday's best answer if you search, And so there's there's always a challenge of 367 00:24:48,839 --> 00:24:52,079 how do we help people realize what is the best thing you can do today? 368 00:24:52,440 --> 00:24:56,119 Right? Yeah? And to that end, what it really means is 369 00:24:56,160 --> 00:25:02,240 the different ways that you can construct let's say a link statement. You know, 370 00:25:02,480 --> 00:25:07,960 if you do something like with from you know, X, sequels parentheses 371 00:25:07,039 --> 00:25:12,279 from blah blah blah in or if you just do list dot were like those 372 00:25:12,319 --> 00:25:17,160 are two different ways to do sart of the same thing with two different syntax 373 00:25:17,200 --> 00:25:19,559 trees. And so if you know how to do those and you're good on 374 00:25:19,599 --> 00:25:23,720 the fundamentals, then when you press the dot, then you'll you'll find the 375 00:25:23,799 --> 00:25:26,960 new stuff. Well, I think, and you bring up an interesting example 376 00:25:27,079 --> 00:25:33,799 because the success of c sharp three to zeros extension methods, it's kind of 377 00:25:33,839 --> 00:25:37,000 been through the roof over the last ten releases, and and you know, 378 00:25:37,440 --> 00:25:41,519 it's much easier to press dot and discover the next thing I need to do 379 00:25:41,599 --> 00:25:44,880 with those extension methods then to go, well, how did I do a 380 00:25:44,920 --> 00:25:48,440 group by I don't remember what the syntax for that is in query expressions, 381 00:25:48,480 --> 00:25:52,400 but I can sort it out when I press dot. And so that's actually 382 00:25:52,480 --> 00:25:55,480 one of the main features we're looking at for c sharp thirteen that we're going 383 00:25:55,559 --> 00:25:59,960 to show, which is you know, extensions that taking more than extension meta 384 00:26:00,000 --> 00:26:03,759 methods, but you know, going further extension properties, being able to you 385 00:26:03,839 --> 00:26:07,480 know, add extension static methods for a type you can I think you got 386 00:26:07,519 --> 00:26:12,440 the slogan for c sharp thirteen just pressed dot, just pressed That's not bad 387 00:26:12,440 --> 00:26:15,640 at all. But we've been talking about that is like, you know, 388 00:26:15,720 --> 00:26:19,519 the discovernment. Yeah, that's fine, that's fine. I know what to 389 00:26:19,559 --> 00:26:27,359 send you back. Yeah, okay, Yeah, dear idiot, I always 390 00:26:27,400 --> 00:26:36,880 think of guitar strings or something. It's funny how much intelligence counts, like 391 00:26:37,119 --> 00:26:42,640 just it's you. You try turning that off and work especially. Yeah, 392 00:26:44,400 --> 00:26:48,400 I mean it's the power of you know, the popularity of type script is 393 00:26:48,680 --> 00:26:52,920 really? Is that? Yeah? You know? Yeah, We've been using 394 00:26:53,200 --> 00:26:59,640 very preliminary bits for our presentation here because what we are showing only ships in 395 00:26:59,720 --> 00:27:02,359 another six months from now, right, So this is a rough version. 396 00:27:02,480 --> 00:27:10,079 So occasionally, you know, thirteen thirteen. Occasionally the idea just goes blank 397 00:27:10,160 --> 00:27:15,480 on us with these bits and you're back in the eighties. Yeah. Wow, 398 00:27:15,720 --> 00:27:18,400 this is hard. I have to tie the whole name of this member 399 00:27:18,519 --> 00:27:22,440 so many clicks, especially with the naming conventions we have. They really made 400 00:27:22,519 --> 00:27:26,119 for completion, you know, yeah, or those times to be completed, 401 00:27:26,240 --> 00:27:30,880 those awkward times when you write a comment that you think copal's going to pick 402 00:27:30,960 --> 00:27:38,599 up on your presenter and nothing happens, and you're like hello, and if 403 00:27:38,640 --> 00:27:41,519 they could speak, it would say shut up. I'm thinking I'm looking at 404 00:27:41,559 --> 00:27:45,519 the c sharp blank getub in the milestones category and for it's like you know, 405 00:27:45,680 --> 00:27:48,960 versions for ten and eleven and twelve and so forth, and needs more 406 00:27:49,000 --> 00:27:53,240 work and backlog and working said and any time, and my favorite of all, 407 00:27:53,519 --> 00:28:00,799 likely never. Yeah, it's very polite, don't get likely. You 408 00:28:00,839 --> 00:28:04,720 could have just said no, or how about the standard Microsoft answer? Why 409 00:28:04,799 --> 00:28:07,960 would you ever want to do that? Yeah, but you know it's not 410 00:28:08,279 --> 00:28:11,960 it's actually not just about politeness. It's a little bit about mindset as well, 411 00:28:12,079 --> 00:28:15,400 Like you want to keep an open mind. It's like, we can't 412 00:28:15,480 --> 00:28:18,960 imagine that right now. Yeah, but who knows, like maybe in two 413 00:28:19,079 --> 00:28:23,799 or three years, so ten that that's actually just maybe this was actually an 414 00:28:23,839 --> 00:28:29,759 insight of sometime in the future, we're going to need this this as opposed 415 00:28:29,759 --> 00:28:32,960 to that's just a crazy idea and we're going to likely never. Yeah, 416 00:28:33,240 --> 00:28:36,279 so we and I'm only half joking, like we really do try to. 417 00:28:36,519 --> 00:28:38,240 Yeah, you got to stay open. Yes, it's the only way to 418 00:28:40,359 --> 00:28:44,279 thrive long term, right, Like is that maybe it will come back around, 419 00:28:44,319 --> 00:28:48,279 it's not. It's a crazy idea only today right at this point in 420 00:28:48,400 --> 00:28:51,400 time, likely not likely never. And with that, gentleman, I had 421 00:28:51,440 --> 00:28:57,799 an interrupt for one moment for this very important message and we're back. It's 422 00:28:57,839 --> 00:29:00,839 not that rocks, I'm mature. Well that's called Franklin. Yo. We're 423 00:29:00,920 --> 00:29:06,240 here in a strange room called the Elliott Bay Room at the conventions that are 424 00:29:06,279 --> 00:29:10,519 in Seattle for build sitting with our friends Mats and Dustin, talking a bit 425 00:29:10,559 --> 00:29:15,559 about how c sharp gets built. Obviously new version coming and the very open 426 00:29:15,720 --> 00:29:19,759 process of you know, it's you want to know what's coming in c sharp, 427 00:29:19,960 --> 00:29:23,640 it's in the GitHub repository. You can pick up those bits and compile 428 00:29:23,720 --> 00:29:26,839 them and play with your own version. If you hate yourself, you know, 429 00:29:27,000 --> 00:29:30,400 like they have those choice you can very least read. Look, you 430 00:29:30,480 --> 00:29:34,400 don't even have to hate yourself that much. You can go use a tool 431 00:29:34,440 --> 00:29:40,519 that's not our tool. But there's there's a website called sharp lab todo where 432 00:29:40,519 --> 00:29:45,240 you can go and play with the different branches. Yeah yeah, literally built 433 00:29:45,279 --> 00:29:48,599 this thing and it's fantastic. It'll yeah yeah. So you literally can pick 434 00:29:48,640 --> 00:29:52,119 a version of a beta version or alpha version of branch out of the rodul 435 00:29:52,720 --> 00:29:57,240 and just go for it. The feature branch that is building let's say params 436 00:29:57,279 --> 00:30:00,640 collections like that feature brand. You can just go and play with that and 437 00:30:00,759 --> 00:30:03,160 see what the feature looks like, so this is built by the community. 438 00:30:03,200 --> 00:30:06,960 Do you use it? We use it all the time, no kidding. 439 00:30:07,039 --> 00:30:11,119 Yeah, that's cool, especially because the code that you write in there becomes 440 00:30:11,160 --> 00:30:14,400 part of the r L, so you can just super easily just keep sending 441 00:30:15,640 --> 00:30:18,680 share it around, share it. Watch this. This is not what we 442 00:30:18,799 --> 00:30:21,279 planned. We do it all the time in the in the in the C 443 00:30:21,400 --> 00:30:23,720 Sharp Language design meeting was like, how did what is that? What does 444 00:30:23,799 --> 00:30:26,480 that? Nobody remembers, right, it's like, oh, just go somebody 445 00:30:26,480 --> 00:30:29,720 writes it up in sharp labs. So here's what it does. Yeah, 446 00:30:29,960 --> 00:30:32,680 somebody's eyes glazes over for a moment, you know, they're they're typing it 447 00:30:32,799 --> 00:30:36,240 up and sharp lab. Right, see what use we actually do with that? 448 00:30:36,440 --> 00:30:41,119 The sharp lab guys just got some serious free advertising the morning We love 449 00:30:41,160 --> 00:30:42,440 you all, Yeah, from Microsoft. I don't think there's any money in 450 00:30:42,519 --> 00:30:47,200 it for them, but they got the glory though. Definitely created a service. 451 00:30:47,319 --> 00:30:49,920 It was a wonderful thing, makes a difference through Yeah, Andre Shecklin, 452 00:30:52,000 --> 00:30:56,200 mind, yeah, sharp on GitHub. It's it's beautiful. It looks 453 00:30:56,279 --> 00:30:56,960 right like soon did I see that? It's like, oh, I know 454 00:30:57,000 --> 00:31:00,960 what to do with that? Off you go you know, you can take 455 00:31:00,000 --> 00:31:03,759 her away, but yeah, you can pick the version. That's amazing. 456 00:31:03,920 --> 00:31:07,359 Here's Richard Campbell playing with it live on radio. So that's right. What 457 00:31:07,480 --> 00:31:11,720 could what could be better? Go wrong? Yeah? So as long as 458 00:31:11,799 --> 00:31:17,160 we're looking at things, I'm just the podcasting listeners need to know that. 459 00:31:17,400 --> 00:31:19,519 I look to my right and I see the Paramount Theater. Yeah, and 460 00:31:19,680 --> 00:31:26,079 like we're two sides of this room are glass looking out at the wonder that 461 00:31:26,400 --> 00:31:30,960 is the gray weather of Sattle. Yes, because they put the audio podcast 462 00:31:32,079 --> 00:31:37,920 in the room of the best Few. Yeah, Paramount looks great. Great, 463 00:31:37,960 --> 00:31:38,920 and one of my favorite shows. Wait wait, don't tell me is 464 00:31:38,960 --> 00:31:44,359 coming there. Well, I know it's a very good whiskey shop around the 465 00:31:44,400 --> 00:31:45,920 corner too. You know, we could just blow off the rest of the 466 00:31:47,039 --> 00:31:49,640 Thursday and just you know, so I could go wrong. Yeah, let's 467 00:31:49,680 --> 00:31:52,960 just walk out on their responsibilities. Would be the first time. Oh wait, 468 00:31:53,359 --> 00:31:57,279 no, that's not true. I probably would. We're pretty good. 469 00:31:57,480 --> 00:32:00,759 Did you get it? Are you getting pushed back for the yearly cadence? 470 00:32:00,920 --> 00:32:06,039 Like? And then get we get into the long term support versus the short 471 00:32:06,160 --> 00:32:08,880 term? Like, I know, I know why we're doing this. I 472 00:32:09,079 --> 00:32:15,640 believe in the idea, but I feel for the working developer whose I don't 473 00:32:15,680 --> 00:32:19,279 think culture is in a place where it's like, we just use the new 474 00:32:19,359 --> 00:32:23,920 versions. We keep using new versions. Corporate Life says wants more stability than 475 00:32:23,960 --> 00:32:29,079 that. They're really not inclined to change unless we really make them, and 476 00:32:29,200 --> 00:32:35,559 this seems somewhat arbiture. Three years from now you need to switch. Well 477 00:32:35,680 --> 00:32:38,960 we I'm going to just I'm going to totally do a dodge here. I 478 00:32:39,119 --> 00:32:45,240 appreciate that the dot net has this release cadence and policy with the LTS and 479 00:32:45,400 --> 00:32:50,039 STS. From a language point of view, that doesn't really matter. We 480 00:32:50,759 --> 00:32:54,680 ship the same roughly the same volume of features, and you don't take features 481 00:32:54,680 --> 00:32:58,759 away. We don't take features away. It doesn't matter to us if it's 482 00:32:58,759 --> 00:33:02,759 an LTS TS release. It matters to the support policy, which is other 483 00:33:02,839 --> 00:33:07,119 people than us generally have to kind of live up to the support policy. 484 00:33:07,279 --> 00:33:13,200 Is there a minimum version of dot net that thirteen will run on. Yes, 485 00:33:13,279 --> 00:33:19,000 and no, so's it's supported only on the latest version. Yes. 486 00:33:19,759 --> 00:33:22,200 However, well, and the big schism was the break for four point eight 487 00:33:22,240 --> 00:33:27,680 where you stopped him winning. You see sharp features, well the old framework, 488 00:33:27,839 --> 00:33:30,599 Well, yeah, well again, yes and no. So here's the 489 00:33:30,680 --> 00:33:36,160 story. There are new versions of the runtime. It will have new APIs 490 00:33:36,200 --> 00:33:39,319 that the language may depend on for certain features. It will have new runtime 491 00:33:39,400 --> 00:33:45,440 features in i L that the language may depend on for some features. And 492 00:33:45,680 --> 00:33:49,599 if you try to target them older, well those features won't work, just 493 00:33:49,680 --> 00:33:53,079 break. But as long as you then you get a nice message saying this 494 00:33:53,160 --> 00:33:57,720 is not supported on the runtime you're targeting, and that's it. I would 495 00:33:57,720 --> 00:33:59,960 have been happy with an object now found because that's so much fun to shay. 496 00:34:00,680 --> 00:34:05,640 Okay, if you know this is we are so friendly now sorry, 497 00:34:06,079 --> 00:34:12,199 yeah, sorry, we so we We don't really, we don't really try 498 00:34:12,239 --> 00:34:15,320 to trip you up there. You're not just stopping anybody when you don't if 499 00:34:15,360 --> 00:34:20,559 you're in visual studio, I don't think that that combination of like pull down 500 00:34:20,639 --> 00:34:22,960 menu shows up for you to mix and match like that, because because you're 501 00:34:23,079 --> 00:34:27,400 entering on supported territories and we're like you have to. But if you just 502 00:34:27,480 --> 00:34:30,239 go and edit your product file and say I want to do this, and 503 00:34:30,400 --> 00:34:32,519 we're like fine, we'll tell you when you catch you and we'll just generate 504 00:34:32,559 --> 00:34:35,880 the errors when the errors come. And if you know what you're doing you 505 00:34:36,000 --> 00:34:37,440 can, you can get pretty far. I mean a lot of us, 506 00:34:37,920 --> 00:34:42,000 you know, are working on Roslin. We're working on projects like Razor. 507 00:34:42,079 --> 00:34:45,239 These are tooling projects, or visual Studio, which still runs on dot net 508 00:34:45,280 --> 00:34:49,840 framework. And so if we want to use new language features in our active 509 00:34:49,880 --> 00:34:52,880 development, then we need to have some ways of kind of doing this, 510 00:34:52,960 --> 00:34:55,519 and you kind of have to like you know, you wind up kind of 511 00:34:55,599 --> 00:35:00,400 like I think with a we've talked about sometimes like a decoder ring sort of 512 00:35:00,480 --> 00:35:02,519 version half big version of the language where it's like, well, I don't 513 00:35:02,559 --> 00:35:08,280 really have default interface methods from c sharp eight because that requires a change in 514 00:35:08,320 --> 00:35:13,760 the run time to support that. But I can get index system dot index 515 00:35:13,840 --> 00:35:16,360 and range, I can. I can write those types myself, and c 516 00:35:16,519 --> 00:35:22,360 Sharp like the compiler generally goes along by checking these API patterns and if they're 517 00:35:22,400 --> 00:35:24,719 there, yeah, they'll support it. Yeah that's crazy. So we do 518 00:35:24,840 --> 00:35:30,440 it. I mean, if a feature is better implemented within your runtime feature, 519 00:35:30,960 --> 00:35:34,000 we will do that. Yeah, we don't always you always target the 520 00:35:34,039 --> 00:35:37,440 best. We always do it. We can if something is like that just 521 00:35:37,519 --> 00:35:39,360 has to happen in the runtime or else it doesn't, we can't make it 522 00:35:39,480 --> 00:35:43,400 work. Or it will be very inefficient or whatever, We'll do it and 523 00:35:43,480 --> 00:35:45,960 then sorry, that feature doesn't work down level. But if it does work 524 00:35:46,000 --> 00:35:50,519 down level, who are we to say and you can't do that? Can 525 00:35:50,559 --> 00:35:52,360 we stop you from doing We say you're in a non supportive scenario. If 526 00:35:52,400 --> 00:35:55,360 you send us bugs based in this will tell tell you stop that that is 527 00:35:57,119 --> 00:36:00,239 that's unsupported. Don't do that. There's one thing that I forget, you 528 00:36:00,320 --> 00:36:04,679 know, sitting in my office and building code all in the latest bits all 529 00:36:04,760 --> 00:36:07,039 the time, is that, you know, people want to do weird things 530 00:36:07,559 --> 00:36:12,920 right because they are weird. And and so I was. And here's a 531 00:36:12,960 --> 00:36:15,920 great example. I was teaching a workshop at dev sum last week in Stockholm 532 00:36:16,400 --> 00:36:22,559 on Blazer and I'm talking about Blazer web assembly where there's a hosted version on 533 00:36:22,639 --> 00:36:24,679 the server side and there's this on the on the other side. And somebody 534 00:36:24,719 --> 00:36:30,480 said, could we run dot net eight on the server and dot net seven 535 00:36:30,599 --> 00:36:34,280 on the client? And my immediate reaction was like, you stupid idiots, 536 00:36:34,320 --> 00:36:38,639 why would you do that? Right? And then I'm talking to Steve Sanderson 537 00:36:38,760 --> 00:36:43,159 like down at the bar, and he goes, why not, Yeah, 538 00:36:43,440 --> 00:36:46,440 yeah, he goes, why wouldn't you Why stop that? Why yeah, 539 00:36:46,559 --> 00:36:52,159 why stop the Why tell that person no that? Why prescribe right right exactly? 540 00:36:52,280 --> 00:36:55,800 Because maybe those are the constraints that they're using. But the fact is, 541 00:36:57,039 --> 00:36:59,840 yeah, that'll work just fine. I mean, and sometimes it's it's 542 00:37:00,000 --> 00:37:02,440 some of our you know, largest customers, some of our biggest dott neet 543 00:37:02,480 --> 00:37:07,039 lovers that have to stay back yeah a while, right, they can't go 544 00:37:07,239 --> 00:37:10,159 forging ahead, They're not nimble enough or whatever. So it's yeah, in 545 00:37:10,239 --> 00:37:15,079 those cases sometimes you know, and guess what they can squeak by done. 546 00:37:15,119 --> 00:37:16,920 That's pretty good. It lasts for a long time. Yeah, yeah, 547 00:37:17,199 --> 00:37:22,480 s's it's legit. Is there an end to this? Like how many language 548 00:37:22,480 --> 00:37:24,239 features do we need? What that's they're gonna say, ah, we're done. 549 00:37:24,320 --> 00:37:28,239 Yeah, yeah, no, you gotta romantic to fifteen and then you're 550 00:37:28,239 --> 00:37:30,320 gonna retire. We're going to move to D now. I forget sharp. 551 00:37:30,440 --> 00:37:37,000 I remember when I was new at Microsoft, one of the first PDC's I 552 00:37:37,079 --> 00:37:39,840 went to when andrews. Heilsberg was still in charge of Sea sharp right, 553 00:37:40,039 --> 00:37:43,920 and I got to tag along with him to an interview like this. It 554 00:37:44,000 --> 00:37:45,800 was probably like two thousand and six, right, something like that, And 555 00:37:46,320 --> 00:37:49,320 I don't think it was you, but it could have been. Yeah, 556 00:37:49,360 --> 00:37:52,960 probably, and somebody. We were there and somebody they asked the question like, 557 00:37:53,559 --> 00:37:57,400 can you keep at this? And Anders was like, hmm, not 558 00:37:57,559 --> 00:38:00,480 forever. I mean we probably have one or two good versions left in US 559 00:38:00,639 --> 00:38:07,079 and we're talking like version three. Yeah, And it just turned out that, 560 00:38:07,559 --> 00:38:12,840 hey, this isn't so bad. You know, you imagine this kitchen 561 00:38:13,000 --> 00:38:17,920 sink train wreck situation if you keep adding stuff. But somehow, somehow we've 562 00:38:19,719 --> 00:38:23,880 managed it. Seems we managed it pretty well to keep adding things to the 563 00:38:24,000 --> 00:38:30,400 language that somehow makes life simpler for development, right, more complicated. I 564 00:38:30,480 --> 00:38:34,800 think we we we focus a lot in this release. We've been talking about 565 00:38:34,840 --> 00:38:37,760 a lot, right, We focus a lot on you know, adding features 566 00:38:38,039 --> 00:38:44,639 or expanding features that you already use, taking out roadblocks that you would hit 567 00:38:44,760 --> 00:38:50,280 with an existing feature, and really kind of making it so that because it's 568 00:38:50,400 --> 00:38:55,800 true that languages do have like a capacity right for like big ideas, right, 569 00:38:55,920 --> 00:39:00,639 and you only get so many big ideas, and so we spend a 570 00:39:00,679 --> 00:39:07,199 lot of time investing in features that maybe aren't giant ideas, right, but 571 00:39:07,400 --> 00:39:12,679 they are like they expand your expressiveness how you can work with existing API. 572 00:39:12,840 --> 00:39:15,599 So often we get things that are like requests from you know, Stephen Tobe 573 00:39:15,639 --> 00:39:17,760 and his team, you know, on the fromt the library's team saying we're 574 00:39:17,760 --> 00:39:22,400 building APIs like this or Fowler David Fowler, like the minimal API stuff with 575 00:39:22,519 --> 00:39:27,719 Sofia right where it was like, we need to write code like this, 576 00:39:28,039 --> 00:39:31,559 we need this kind of expressiveness out of C sharp, and it causes us 577 00:39:31,599 --> 00:39:35,199 to kind of just take a look at the features we already haven't say well, 578 00:39:35,239 --> 00:39:38,119 how can we make those better? And they sound like big features, 579 00:39:38,159 --> 00:39:42,519 but they end up being kind of you know, adjustments to to things that 580 00:39:42,679 --> 00:39:45,039 just make things kind of more satisfying to use. Do you guys usually start 581 00:39:45,119 --> 00:39:52,719 with extension methods in terms of experimenting with new features. No, no, 582 00:39:52,960 --> 00:39:55,920 think so. I don't think so No, I in what way do you 583 00:39:57,000 --> 00:39:58,920 mean? Well? Okay, so, like let's say you want to add 584 00:39:59,000 --> 00:40:01,840 something new to string, I mean canonical example, right, so you do 585 00:40:01,920 --> 00:40:07,199 a string extension library and just add your there. Yes, I think that, 586 00:40:07,639 --> 00:40:12,679 but that's more like the library people. And certainly when people are prototyping 587 00:40:13,159 --> 00:40:16,000 should I put this new member or these new members on an existing type, 588 00:40:16,039 --> 00:40:21,119 they will start out with extension methods if they happen to be instance methods or 589 00:40:21,400 --> 00:40:23,920 if not, well, up until C sharp thirteen they wouldn't have been able 590 00:40:23,960 --> 00:40:27,800 to. But now, of course they can just be able to. Soon 591 00:40:27,960 --> 00:40:30,920 do tell. I mean, they'll be able to add extension properties or extension 592 00:40:30,960 --> 00:40:36,519 index ers, static this or that, or operators and that's new and thirteen 593 00:40:37,639 --> 00:40:39,920 extension everything. Yeah, somebody will come in because this is one of those 594 00:40:39,960 --> 00:40:44,039 down payments, right, Well, there'll be extension, some new things, 595 00:40:44,079 --> 00:40:47,360 and then we'll probably keep adding stension, more things and extension all like that 596 00:40:47,519 --> 00:40:52,480 idea. Yeah, well, I mean, and again we go back to 597 00:40:52,599 --> 00:40:58,480 a show the pivot to Core and see I think with C sharp six, 598 00:40:58,519 --> 00:41:01,639 where if they said to you, this feels like the Cambrian explosion, Like 599 00:41:01,760 --> 00:41:07,880 you've now setting yourselves up for all these extension approaches to allow many people, 600 00:41:07,079 --> 00:41:10,920 including folks inside of Microsoft, to extend the language the way they want to 601 00:41:12,320 --> 00:41:16,320 and see how that resonates and decide what becomes more than an extension. Yeah, 602 00:41:16,360 --> 00:41:20,480 I think I asked you this last time we talked. But are there 603 00:41:20,519 --> 00:41:25,239 any features that, after implementing, you regretted adding because they've been abused or 604 00:41:25,400 --> 00:41:30,880 used wrongly? Hmmm I mean, I know there's some that we added and 605 00:41:30,039 --> 00:41:36,840 then decided not to keep as good. That was during the cycle that we're 606 00:41:36,840 --> 00:41:40,159 out there in preview. That's that leaps to mind, and that's a good 607 00:41:40,199 --> 00:41:44,079 thing. You put it out there. You watch what happened with you go, 608 00:41:44,760 --> 00:41:46,719 that's not right. But there are dangerous features like new you know, 609 00:41:46,880 --> 00:41:52,920 to create new versions of methods that are I guess it was shadows and VB 610 00:41:52,159 --> 00:41:55,159 right, where you have one class and then in a subclass and you can 611 00:41:55,280 --> 00:42:00,679 just take over that whatever that method is or that property handler. I've seen 612 00:42:00,719 --> 00:42:04,639 that abused. Yeah, and then you lose track and lose control of your 613 00:42:05,639 --> 00:42:09,159 of your code. There's a difference between a feature can be abused and then 614 00:42:09,400 --> 00:42:13,480 I wish we hadn't done it. Okay, Yeah, that's a good point. 615 00:42:13,599 --> 00:42:15,559 I mean, they might be that their feature by and large is a 616 00:42:15,599 --> 00:42:19,440 great feature and adding a lot of value. And yes, here and there 617 00:42:19,480 --> 00:42:23,000 people also abusing Harry carrying kit for twelve year olds or for example. But 618 00:42:23,119 --> 00:42:27,719 any powerful language has that shoot your toe off effect, Like that's sort of 619 00:42:27,760 --> 00:42:30,280 a measure. It's not a real language, and you can't blow your toe 620 00:42:30,320 --> 00:42:31,920 off, all right, So let's forget about bad. Yes, there's like 621 00:42:32,000 --> 00:42:37,440 the language features that I wouldn't say I completely regret them, but maybe they 622 00:42:37,480 --> 00:42:40,920 didn't have the impact they thought they'd bigger. And because now you have you 623 00:42:42,079 --> 00:42:46,119 have a measure that we don't know of, which was effort. I imagine 624 00:42:46,239 --> 00:42:51,960 you worked really hard on certain features, absolutely, and the customer doesn't do 625 00:42:52,159 --> 00:42:54,199 what you thought. Take a feature like dynamic, right, we can talk 626 00:42:54,239 --> 00:42:59,639 about dynamic. Sure. It was a massive effort, and it was part 627 00:42:59,679 --> 00:43:02,960 of a it was part of a future that never really fully came to, 628 00:43:05,760 --> 00:43:10,039 in which there was Python and Ruby running on dot net and it and also 629 00:43:10,320 --> 00:43:14,880 in which people were using comments were up much more than they ended up doing. 630 00:43:15,960 --> 00:43:22,320 And so all of this came together into this beautiful feature that happens to 631 00:43:22,440 --> 00:43:30,840 be also you know, a big performance bottleneg and a big tax on us 632 00:43:30,920 --> 00:43:36,440 forever more and so as abercoll, it generated lots of bio. Yeah, 633 00:43:36,960 --> 00:43:40,639 and it became it became a it became a hindrance for other directions we wanted 634 00:43:40,639 --> 00:43:45,199 to go. And when dot Native was happening, it became a problem like 635 00:43:45,239 --> 00:43:49,840 how do we compile US native code? Because yeah, because it turns out 636 00:43:49,880 --> 00:43:53,960 that it's the impact it had was Newton Soft Jason people people used it for 637 00:43:54,079 --> 00:43:59,199 Jason and uh, and so then it wound up in a lot of apps. 638 00:43:59,760 --> 00:44:01,440 But in this you know, then it'd liked me. It harder to 639 00:44:01,679 --> 00:44:05,320 compile than the native code and all that sort, and you can't take it 640 00:44:05,400 --> 00:44:07,360 out. Yeah, no, but correct. But I also want to point 641 00:44:07,400 --> 00:44:12,679 out, like, even even as it has those drawbacks, and even as 642 00:44:13,039 --> 00:44:15,320 things didn't go the way we imagine when we to sign it. You know, 643 00:44:15,400 --> 00:44:19,360 sometimes you see code where people using you just like, yeah, all 644 00:44:19,480 --> 00:44:21,599 right, all right, okay, I see that, now that's cool, 645 00:44:21,880 --> 00:44:25,360 you know, so it yeah, it would we have done it that same 646 00:44:25,400 --> 00:44:29,239 way if we had known, Yeah, how the world would have gone? 647 00:44:29,320 --> 00:44:32,480 Probably not. Yeah, but it's but that's not to say that I fully 648 00:44:32,559 --> 00:44:36,119 regretted either. I thought it was a beautiful to sign. It was also 649 00:44:36,239 --> 00:44:40,960 in between two largely successful features, between Link and ACYNC, between those those 650 00:44:42,079 --> 00:44:45,000 versions of the language, so you know, we can kind of the middle 651 00:44:45,039 --> 00:44:47,880 sibling in that. Yeah, exactly. I've always paid attention to Iron Python 652 00:44:49,559 --> 00:44:52,639 and Iron Ruby wasn't around for near as long, but you know, we 653 00:44:52,719 --> 00:44:54,559 had John Lamb on it, and yeah, look, both those languages are 654 00:44:54,760 --> 00:44:59,480 enjoyable. I write more Python, I care to admit, because I do 655 00:44:59,639 --> 00:45:01,480 a lot data handling, Like it's just a big chunk of my life. 656 00:45:01,599 --> 00:45:05,800 And by golly, Python's flipping good at that. And get Hub likes to 657 00:45:05,840 --> 00:45:10,599 remind me once a year you wrote more Python than your thought. But yeah, 658 00:45:10,719 --> 00:45:14,360 you know, I remember dabbling and Ruby going this is very cool. 659 00:45:14,440 --> 00:45:16,480 I do not need this. It's not a thing for me. But it's 660 00:45:16,519 --> 00:45:22,159 not just a dynamic ness I think. I mean, Python nails a few 661 00:45:22,199 --> 00:45:24,480 other things really well. One of course is it's always had this alignment with 662 00:45:24,639 --> 00:45:30,039 the numbers community, which has grown up to be scientific and then machine learning 663 00:45:30,119 --> 00:45:35,239 and then AI and like it. It was really good at at exploiting that 664 00:45:35,400 --> 00:45:43,800 affinity to to popularity there being really easy to use for people aren't professional developers 665 00:45:43,880 --> 00:45:49,360 necessarily. But then also some things are just really neat, and people have 666 00:45:49,440 --> 00:45:52,719 done a lot of hard work inside of Python to make some things remarkably easy. 667 00:45:53,000 --> 00:45:57,000 Yeah, and we've and we've definitely stolen from there. Like if you 668 00:45:57,039 --> 00:46:00,880 look at if you look at ind index and rain, it was like it 669 00:46:00,039 --> 00:46:05,039 was nailed. Should this is so cool in Python? Why is it so 670 00:46:05,119 --> 00:46:10,400 hard? And t sharp was Yeah, There was even a whole thing around 671 00:46:10,519 --> 00:46:14,760 the indexes where we wanted to do the you know, index from the end 672 00:46:15,320 --> 00:46:17,320 of of of an array or something like that, and we couldn't use the 673 00:46:17,360 --> 00:46:22,760 Python syntax because the Python syntexts use negatives minus one. We're like, we 674 00:46:22,880 --> 00:46:25,159 can't do that. I remember the meeting like, it was like but why. 675 00:46:25,280 --> 00:46:29,559 It was like, because that that compiles and grows today and that would 676 00:46:29,559 --> 00:46:34,440 be a break and change at run time for chaos chaos. So we ended 677 00:46:34,519 --> 00:46:37,880 up using the hat character for it. That was the only concession we made. 678 00:46:37,920 --> 00:46:39,880 We really strive. We were very inspired by Python. And yeah, 679 00:46:40,400 --> 00:46:44,239 because because there's features in c sharp, they have gone everywhere, like I 680 00:46:44,320 --> 00:46:49,440 you think a weight gone every Yes, it is a better way to think 681 00:46:49,480 --> 00:46:55,599 about x ascretous execution. It just is C plus plus. Guys adopted it, 682 00:46:55,760 --> 00:46:59,119 like what the what. Yeah, we're pretty proud about it. You 683 00:46:59,199 --> 00:47:01,639 should be. That's the hell of a thing. But it's like, yeah, 684 00:47:01,639 --> 00:47:06,000 and it's interesting thinking the terms of when people have it right, copy 685 00:47:06,079 --> 00:47:08,519 it. Yeah, I mean everybody's happier and it's a compliment. Yeah, 686 00:47:08,880 --> 00:47:13,559 you got this right. This was the right way, and so we should 687 00:47:13,639 --> 00:47:16,880 use it absolutely and we've done it. We've definitely just mentioned we've done our 688 00:47:16,960 --> 00:47:22,400 share of they being heavily inspired yea and vice versa. You have inspired others. 689 00:47:22,440 --> 00:47:24,840 Absolutely, Yeah, we're all better for it. Yeah, are we? 690 00:47:25,760 --> 00:47:29,920 Now? This angle of this is, are we converging in languages? 691 00:47:30,239 --> 00:47:36,519 I don't know. There seems to be. There's definitely something happened where languages 692 00:47:36,599 --> 00:47:43,559 went from being very purely themselves to all sort of going all going for the 693 00:47:43,719 --> 00:47:51,079 center and kind of slapping optic grind and functional things together, simpler syntaxes, 694 00:47:51,199 --> 00:47:54,880 and where we all kind of there's a WorldWind of borrowing from each other, 695 00:47:54,960 --> 00:48:00,719 where we all end up in sort of like ant a pragmatic center. Yeah, 696 00:48:00,480 --> 00:48:04,920 the general purpose language is I also think there's a cult of non general 697 00:48:04,920 --> 00:48:08,480 purpose line. Yes, yes, there's only languages with a purpose, right 698 00:48:09,480 --> 00:48:13,159 or a goal. But even still they'll be like you know, those of 699 00:48:13,159 --> 00:48:16,000 those languages will still a lot of times bring some of these paradigms in because 700 00:48:16,000 --> 00:48:20,039 they're natural and they're proven. It's been I mean, guys, it's been 701 00:48:20,400 --> 00:48:23,920 twenty years since we were like talking about link and PC, right, so 702 00:48:25,199 --> 00:48:29,599 you know, and it's that's that brought a lot of mainstream for at least 703 00:48:29,639 --> 00:48:31,199 for those that were had their eyes on. Microsoft brought a lot of that 704 00:48:31,239 --> 00:48:34,320 functional stuff. I mean we talked about it in the show over the time, 705 00:48:34,360 --> 00:48:39,159 but I watched the way F sharp evolved and seeing sort of the concessions 706 00:48:39,239 --> 00:48:45,440 to practicality. It's the functional purity. I get it. Go live in 707 00:48:45,519 --> 00:48:51,559 haske Land, you know, practical functionality. There's some concessions and F sharp 708 00:48:51,639 --> 00:48:54,320 struck that I thought. Yes, it's still a very small part of the 709 00:48:54,440 --> 00:48:59,800 market. The F sharp enthusiasts are enthusiastic. But that I think it's also 710 00:48:59,800 --> 00:49:02,000 a product of being a smaller club, is that those that are in it 711 00:49:02,079 --> 00:49:07,320 take it very seriously. It also has a certain like it's it's very intellectually 712 00:49:07,360 --> 00:49:10,480 stimulating. Write codin right, and so you're like, I'm doing really well. 713 00:49:12,039 --> 00:49:15,000 When you g get my head in the functional space and I write a 714 00:49:15,119 --> 00:49:19,840 nice expressive, I am delighted. It's like a factory. Man, I'm 715 00:49:19,920 --> 00:49:22,880 just fun. That's the way we used to feel about C plus plus. 716 00:49:22,360 --> 00:49:28,320 Hey, I did it file and it doesn't crash the machine for at least 717 00:49:28,360 --> 00:49:31,360 an hour. That is good. I feel good. Hey, you know, 718 00:49:32,199 --> 00:49:35,920 write a good sequel expression is like that too. When you can actually, 719 00:49:36,079 --> 00:49:38,199 you know, it's another kind of functional mindset of here is a good 720 00:49:38,360 --> 00:49:43,239 efficient expression that gets as the precisely the result we want and it's optimal, 721 00:49:43,360 --> 00:49:45,880 and you're like, yeah, this thing just works. Yeah yeah. Before 722 00:49:45,960 --> 00:49:49,840 we hang up, I want to go back to what we were talking about 723 00:49:49,840 --> 00:49:52,760 at the beginning of the show, which is Ai, you just said something 724 00:49:52,840 --> 00:49:54,599 that made me reminded me of this. You know, when you write a 725 00:49:54,800 --> 00:50:00,880 good sequel expression, you write a good function. Yeah, whatever language. 726 00:50:01,079 --> 00:50:06,800 Now we're having these tools do it for us. So let's say you need 727 00:50:06,880 --> 00:50:10,719 it to hire a junior developer. How are you going to know if they 728 00:50:10,800 --> 00:50:15,599 are if they're there GPT brain or you know, copilot brain, or they 729 00:50:15,679 --> 00:50:22,639 can actually think in code and actually reason through this stuff. Well or do 730 00:50:22,679 --> 00:50:29,480 you care? I do care because I feel that if you're just doing that 731 00:50:30,079 --> 00:50:35,159 right, you're not using the tool. You're being used by the tool, 732 00:50:35,320 --> 00:50:39,159 right, you know, I don't want that, right, Like when when 733 00:50:39,199 --> 00:50:43,599 I when new engineers, when new engineers come to me, I want to 734 00:50:43,639 --> 00:50:45,800 know what their side projects are. I want to know how much they love 735 00:50:46,519 --> 00:50:51,199 this work and uh, and that speaks to me more than like and then 736 00:50:51,199 --> 00:50:55,239 if they're using AI. I'm pretty confident that they're using it to be productive, 737 00:50:55,880 --> 00:51:00,360 but they're they're passionate about the space, they're passionate about software. That's 738 00:51:00,440 --> 00:51:02,559 That's how I've been collecting. I've been talking to a lot of pms and 739 00:51:02,559 --> 00:51:07,039 collecting data around what after more than a year, what get hep co pilot's 740 00:51:07,039 --> 00:51:10,199 been doing to check in patterns. And one of the things that's really emerged 741 00:51:10,199 --> 00:51:16,639 from that is, uh, revert within a few hours or almost nothing, 742 00:51:17,280 --> 00:51:21,960 like they pretty much the code is correct. So it has changed because it 743 00:51:22,199 --> 00:51:25,239 is less iteration and major refactoring and so forth. Like typically the code comes 744 00:51:25,320 --> 00:51:30,000 up pretty good and it stays or they haven't thought about it enough and the 745 00:51:30,079 --> 00:51:34,000 come was completely wrong. Take it out, start again, yea. And 746 00:51:34,119 --> 00:51:38,679 that seems like an interaction with like an intern where it's like, oh, 747 00:51:38,800 --> 00:51:42,159 take a stab at this, let's see where it goes. Oh okay, 748 00:51:42,199 --> 00:51:45,440 well that wasn't the right way, Let's go try it again, as opposed 749 00:51:45,480 --> 00:51:47,480 to you know, iterate, iterate, iterate, iterating, Yeah, why 750 00:51:47,480 --> 00:51:51,360 do you think that is? Do you feel like it's like it's not it's 751 00:51:51,400 --> 00:51:52,800 produced something that you're like, Okay, I don't want to refine this. 752 00:51:52,880 --> 00:51:55,159 I need to go back to the drawing board. Yeah, well, I 753 00:51:55,239 --> 00:51:59,599 get the sense that this is you're also watching the shape of people learning to 754 00:51:59,760 --> 00:52:01,960 work with this tool, and they're asking you to do things they don't fully 755 00:52:02,079 --> 00:52:07,199 understand. When they do fully understand, it doesn't make it to the check 756 00:52:07,280 --> 00:52:10,320 in until it's right. But when they don't fully understand their check it anyway, 757 00:52:10,320 --> 00:52:13,119 then they realize they're going a mistake. It went away. So my 758 00:52:13,239 --> 00:52:16,639 thinking now is a year from now that pattern will change as those people get 759 00:52:16,719 --> 00:52:21,000 more experienced, there will be less revert events. But at the moment where 760 00:52:21,079 --> 00:52:23,360 this like there's an argument and I was talking to people, it is like 761 00:52:23,400 --> 00:52:27,719 this is not working. People reverting code a lot, and I'm like, 762 00:52:27,800 --> 00:52:30,400 but then what happens, Well, then they do it again and it goes 763 00:52:30,559 --> 00:52:35,360 and it goes better. It's like interesting, So that's really cool observation, 764 00:52:35,920 --> 00:52:39,440 manifestation of the learnings. It's not just is AI doing what it should as 765 00:52:39,480 --> 00:52:45,440 a tool, it's also us learning to use it the way that it the 766 00:52:45,519 --> 00:52:47,440 way that it was actually going to be good. Yeah that's what you want 767 00:52:47,480 --> 00:52:51,960 it to Yeah, interesting times, Yes, it's very interesting. And guys, 768 00:52:52,000 --> 00:52:53,800 what's next? For you. I know that C sharp thirteen is about 769 00:52:53,800 --> 00:52:59,199 after build. I bet November just to guess what about after build? What 770 00:52:59,239 --> 00:53:02,199 are you going back to work on besides Sea sharp thirteen? What's next besides 771 00:53:02,239 --> 00:53:07,599 Oh, personally, I'm very interested in see sharp fourteen. If I didn't 772 00:53:07,599 --> 00:53:13,039 see that coming, right, let's just knock that out of the part. 773 00:53:13,360 --> 00:53:16,519 You know, there are a few So with the extensions work that's starting to 774 00:53:16,639 --> 00:53:22,159 roll out and see Sharp thirteen. Hopefully that's like one of the big things 775 00:53:22,199 --> 00:53:24,960 that have been on the radar for a long time that starts to come to 776 00:53:25,079 --> 00:53:29,280 freih So is it triage like this isn't going to make it that will be 777 00:53:29,320 --> 00:53:32,559 fourteen. No, it's just fleshing it out right and making sure that when 778 00:53:32,599 --> 00:53:39,519 we go so. But besides extensions, there are a few other things on 779 00:53:39,599 --> 00:53:45,440 the radar currently that will say are like big, big feature areas that it 780 00:53:45,440 --> 00:53:47,440 would be really cool if we can nail. From a design perspective. One 781 00:53:47,480 --> 00:53:52,000 of the ones that we get asked about a lot is unions union types, 782 00:53:52,880 --> 00:53:57,400 and we are very actively looking at that, but we still haven't reached a 783 00:53:57,440 --> 00:53:59,559 point where we can say, oh, this is how we're going to do 784 00:53:59,639 --> 00:54:07,000 it. There's sort of two competing approaches out there in existing languages. That's 785 00:54:07,039 --> 00:54:14,280 discriminated unions and functional land that are very sort of declared types and alternative to 786 00:54:14,559 --> 00:54:20,039 optagonoid inheritance almost. And then there's union types in typescript, which are very 787 00:54:20,119 --> 00:54:25,480 much a different thing, much more structural, lightweight thing, and both have 788 00:54:25,719 --> 00:54:30,920 really good arguments going for them. They're also quite far apart. So when 789 00:54:31,000 --> 00:54:36,239 we say we would like to do something with unions, what do we end 790 00:54:36,320 --> 00:54:39,079 up actually really needing on top of what's already in C shark in order to 791 00:54:39,119 --> 00:54:43,920 give people your expressiveness. So that's one that I hope to be able to 792 00:54:44,000 --> 00:54:49,119 devote more time and effort to. Cool. Yeah, a few other things 793 00:54:49,199 --> 00:54:55,039 like that, how about you. Well, since I write code instead of 794 00:54:55,079 --> 00:55:00,280 imagine code like maths, I'm kidding, Mads, I'm sorry. I like 795 00:55:00,360 --> 00:55:04,159 to take things apart and put them back together a comeback right now. No, 796 00:55:04,280 --> 00:55:06,000 I know he is, he's going to give it to me after the 797 00:55:06,039 --> 00:55:09,000 case. But I like to take things apart and put them back together again. 798 00:55:09,039 --> 00:55:15,039 And so right now I am working on that for Razor Tooling and Compiler. 799 00:55:15,199 --> 00:55:19,760 It's something that a lot of our customers write a lot of a lot 800 00:55:19,800 --> 00:55:23,639 of a lot of razor and and and it's also at the you know, 801 00:55:24,119 --> 00:55:28,960 forefront and importance of like things like Blazer and some of the most important platforms. 802 00:55:29,039 --> 00:55:31,719 So I'm trying to get that tooling stack with the help of some very 803 00:55:31,800 --> 00:55:37,239 smart people, they're trying to get that really turned around into something that we 804 00:55:37,320 --> 00:55:39,800 can we can feel like is going to be, you know, lightweight and 805 00:55:39,880 --> 00:55:44,119 successful. That's awesome. Yeah, all right, guys, well I think 806 00:55:44,159 --> 00:55:46,159 that's it. Thanks very much, and have a great rest of your time 807 00:55:46,239 --> 00:55:50,480 at build. Thank you very much. I always a pleasure, Yes, 808 00:55:50,599 --> 00:55:53,360 definitely for us too, and we'll see you next time. A dot net 809 00:55:53,800 --> 00:56:19,679 rock. Dot net Rocks is brought to you by Franklin's Net and produced by 810 00:56:19,800 --> 00:56:24,679 Pop Studios, a full service audio, video and post production facility located physically 811 00:56:24,800 --> 00:56:30,719 in New London, Connecticut, and of course in the cloud online at pwop 812 00:56:30,960 --> 00:56:34,760 dot com. Visit our website at d O T N E t R O 813 00:56:34,960 --> 00:56:39,199 c k S dot com for RSS feeds, downloads, mobile apps, comments, 814 00:56:39,559 --> 00:56:44,639 and access to the full archives going back to show number one, recorded 815 00:56:44,679 --> 00:56:47,599 in September two thousand and two, and make sure you check out our sponsors. 816 00:56:47,760 --> 00:56:52,360 They keep us in business. Now go write some code. See you 817 00:56:52,480 --> 00:57:02,360 next time. You got meddle Vans and my bed is harder than my taxes 818 00:57:02,440 --> 00:57:05,119 in lie credit roll