<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>manigandham</author><text>.NET Standard&amp;#x2F;Core 2.0 will add back many APIs. It&amp;#x27;ll be the real release of the newer framework, similar to how the original .NET Framework took until v2 to get things into shape.&lt;p&gt;.NET Standard is all about compatibility - so you can use that to determine which framework you can&amp;#x2F;need to use. However .NET Core is a distinctly designed for cross-platform reach so it will be a break from .NET Framework in some ways - this is just a given, otherwise they would&amp;#x27;ve just released another .NET Framework version instead of doing all this.</text><parent_chain><item><author>giancarlostoro</author><text>&amp;gt;&amp;gt; Just over 2 years ago Microsoft open-sourced the entire .NET framework,&lt;p&gt;Except they open-sourced a new .NET stack, not really the entire .NET Framework, .NET Core and .NET Framework are similar but not fully backwards compatible. I&amp;#x27;ve been porting .NET Framework code to .NET Core and depending on how specialized your project is you may not always find the same libraries supporting your project. A project that perfectly compiles with .NET 2.0 will not just compile for .NET Core, at least not as easily as using a .NET Framework 2.0 project in .NET Framework 4.6. I love Microsoft and .NET but I think Core is executed poorly. You also have EntityFramework vs. EntityFramework Core which lacks features from EF which were deemed &amp;quot;unused&amp;quot; which bites some people in the face.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Guide to the CoreCLR Source Code</title><url>http://mattwarren.org/2017/03/23/Hitchhikers-Guide-to-the-CoreCLR-Source-Code/</url></story>
<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>matthewwarren</author><text>Well, it depends how you look at it, but you have a point.&lt;p&gt;I guess I could&amp;#x27;ve written &amp;#x27;Microsoft open-sourced the entire .NET stack&amp;#x27;. I wanted to make it clear that they open-sourced everything, i.e. runtime, JIT, GC, base-class libraries, etc</text><parent_chain><item><author>giancarlostoro</author><text>&amp;gt;&amp;gt; Just over 2 years ago Microsoft open-sourced the entire .NET framework,&lt;p&gt;Except they open-sourced a new .NET stack, not really the entire .NET Framework, .NET Core and .NET Framework are similar but not fully backwards compatible. I&amp;#x27;ve been porting .NET Framework code to .NET Core and depending on how specialized your project is you may not always find the same libraries supporting your project. A project that perfectly compiles with .NET 2.0 will not just compile for .NET Core, at least not as easily as using a .NET Framework 2.0 project in .NET Framework 4.6. I love Microsoft and .NET but I think Core is executed poorly. You also have EntityFramework vs. EntityFramework Core which lacks features from EF which were deemed &amp;quot;unused&amp;quot; which bites some people in the face.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Guide to the CoreCLR Source Code</title><url>http://mattwarren.org/2017/03/23/Hitchhikers-Guide-to-the-CoreCLR-Source-Code/</url></story>