<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>ajryan</author><text>We use .NET core in production and are very happy. A mixture of EF Core (for ad-hoc queries) and Dapper (for stored procs) works just fine. Also, new in EF Core 2.1, you can map views and stored procs just fine: &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;docs.microsoft.com&amp;#x2F;en-us&amp;#x2F;ef&amp;#x2F;core&amp;#x2F;modeling&amp;#x2F;query-types&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;docs.microsoft.com&amp;#x2F;en-us&amp;#x2F;ef&amp;#x2F;core&amp;#x2F;modeling&amp;#x2F;query-type...&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;p&gt;That&amp;#x27;s your only specific example - what other functionality are you missing?&lt;p&gt;You&amp;#x27;re not willing to commit to .NET core but you admit that NetFx is going into maintenance mode?</text><parent_chain><item><author>SimonPStevens</author><text>I want to like .Net Core, I really do. But in my opinion its just not yet ready for serious use.&lt;p&gt;An example. If you want to use .Net Core you can&amp;#x27;t use entity framework, you have to use EF Core, which doesn&amp;#x27;t yet support mapping to views or stored procs, only tables.&lt;p&gt;Now you might think that&amp;#x27;s fine, maybe you only want to map to tables. But it&amp;#x27;s the same story all over the ecosystem. Many major projects have a separate netfx and core package, and many times the core package has restricted functionality. You will almost certainly find a whole host of things you need are missing.&lt;p&gt;And then you get the fact that ASP.Net Core is dropping support for .Netfx in the next release, so if you want to use ASP.net Core you are now limited to EF core too, which means you are making a full jump and can&amp;#x27;t just go halfway first. And .netfx is now not going to support .net standard 2.1.&lt;p&gt;The list of incompatibilities and restrictions just goes on and on. I certainly can&amp;#x27;t keep the full list in my head. So right now I&amp;#x27;m not really willing to commit to a new project of any significance on .net core because I know there will be dozens of missing dependencies or features.&lt;p&gt;You could argue this is just want it&amp;#x27;s like at the cutting edge, and the gaps will be filled in time. But .netfx is clearly already going into maintenance mode, so the push to move to .net core has already started.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>What Makes .NET Core So Special?</title><url>https://www.blog.jamesmichaelhickey.com/What-Makes-NET-Core-So-Special-Why-You-Should-Use-NET-Core/</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>davedx</author><text>I&amp;#x27;m working on a fairly complex e-commerce platform built on .Net Core, I&amp;#x27;m really happy with it. We use EF core too.&lt;p&gt;It&amp;#x27;s a pretty serious project, and for us, the benefits of our developers being able to natively develop on Macbooks and being able to deploy to Linux containers outweighs missing features.&lt;p&gt;Swings and roundabouts...</text><parent_chain><item><author>SimonPStevens</author><text>I want to like .Net Core, I really do. But in my opinion its just not yet ready for serious use.&lt;p&gt;An example. If you want to use .Net Core you can&amp;#x27;t use entity framework, you have to use EF Core, which doesn&amp;#x27;t yet support mapping to views or stored procs, only tables.&lt;p&gt;Now you might think that&amp;#x27;s fine, maybe you only want to map to tables. But it&amp;#x27;s the same story all over the ecosystem. Many major projects have a separate netfx and core package, and many times the core package has restricted functionality. You will almost certainly find a whole host of things you need are missing.&lt;p&gt;And then you get the fact that ASP.Net Core is dropping support for .Netfx in the next release, so if you want to use ASP.net Core you are now limited to EF core too, which means you are making a full jump and can&amp;#x27;t just go halfway first. And .netfx is now not going to support .net standard 2.1.&lt;p&gt;The list of incompatibilities and restrictions just goes on and on. I certainly can&amp;#x27;t keep the full list in my head. So right now I&amp;#x27;m not really willing to commit to a new project of any significance on .net core because I know there will be dozens of missing dependencies or features.&lt;p&gt;You could argue this is just want it&amp;#x27;s like at the cutting edge, and the gaps will be filled in time. But .netfx is clearly already going into maintenance mode, so the push to move to .net core has already started.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>What Makes .NET Core So Special?</title><url>https://www.blog.jamesmichaelhickey.com/What-Makes-NET-Core-So-Special-Why-You-Should-Use-NET-Core/</url></story>