Pros of runtime

• More focused and specific to the .NET runtime implementation
• Generally more active development and frequent updates
• Deeper level of technical discussions and contributions

Cons of runtime

• Steeper learning curve for newcomers to .NET development
• Less comprehensive documentation for general .NET usage
• Narrower scope, focusing primarily on runtime components

Code Comparison

runtime:

public static int Main(string[] args)
{
    Console.WriteLine("Hello World!");
    return 0;
}

dotnet:

using System;

class Program
{
    static void Main(string[] args)
    {
        Console.WriteLine("Hello World!");
    }
}

The runtime example shows a more low-level implementation, while the dotnet example demonstrates a higher-level, more user-friendly approach typical for general .NET development.

Summary

runtime is ideal for developers working on the core .NET implementation, offering in-depth access to runtime components. dotnet, on the other hand, provides a broader overview of .NET development, making it more suitable for general-purpose .NET programming and learning. Choose runtime for deep runtime work, and dotnet for general .NET development and resources.

Pros of mono

• Longer history and more established codebase
• Broader platform support, including older systems
• More flexible licensing (MIT License)

Cons of mono

• Generally slower performance compared to .NET
• Less frequent updates and smaller development community
• Limited support for newer .NET features

Code Comparison

mono:

public class Example
{
    public static void Main()
    {
        Console.WriteLine("Hello from Mono!");
    }
}

dotnet:

using System;

class Program
{
    static void Main(string[] args)
    {
        Console.WriteLine("Hello from .NET!");
    }
}

The code examples are very similar, reflecting the shared C# language. However, dotnet typically uses more modern conventions and may offer additional features or optimizations not available in mono.

Pros of aspnetcore

• More focused on web development, providing specialized tools and frameworks
• Faster release cycle for new features and improvements
• Deeper integration with modern web technologies and patterns

Cons of aspnetcore

• Narrower scope, less suitable for general-purpose .NET development
• Potentially steeper learning curve for developers new to ASP.NET
• May require additional dependencies for non-web-related tasks

Code Comparison

aspnetcore:

app.MapGet("/", () => "Hello World!");
app.MapPost("/api/data", (MyData data) => ProcessData(data));
app.Run();

dotnet:

Console.WriteLine("Hello World!");
var data = JsonSerializer.Deserialize<MyData>(jsonString);
ProcessData(data);

The aspnetcore example shows a typical web API setup, while the dotnet example demonstrates general-purpose .NET code. aspnetcore is more concise for web-specific tasks, but dotnet offers broader flexibility for various application types.

Pros of core

• More focused on the .NET Core runtime and framework
• Generally more up-to-date with the latest .NET Core developments
• Cleaner repository structure, making it easier to navigate and contribute

Cons of core

• Less comprehensive documentation compared to dotnet
• Fewer resources for beginners and those transitioning from .NET Framework
• More specialized, potentially less suitable for general .NET development

Code Comparison

core:

using System;

class Program
{
    static void Main()
    {
        Console.WriteLine("Hello, .NET Core!");
    }
}

dotnet:

using System;

namespace ConsoleApp
{
    class Program
    {
        static void Main(string[] args)
        {
            Console.WriteLine("Hello, .NET!");
        }
    }
}

The code examples are similar, with core using a more concise structure typical of .NET Core applications, while dotnet follows a more traditional .NET Framework approach with explicit namespace declaration.

Pros of Roslyn

• Focused specifically on the .NET compiler platform, providing deeper insights into language services
• More granular control over code analysis and compilation processes
• Extensive API for developing custom code analysis tools and language extensions

Cons of Roslyn

• Steeper learning curve due to its specialized nature
• Narrower scope compared to the broader .NET ecosystem coverage of dotnet
• May require more frequent updates to keep pace with language feature changes

Code Comparison

Roslyn (C# compiler API usage):

var tree = CSharpSyntaxTree.ParseText("class Program { static void Main() { } }");
var root = tree.GetRoot();
var classDeclaration = root.DescendantNodes().OfType<ClassDeclarationSyntax>().First();
Console.WriteLine(classDeclaration.Identifier.Text);

dotnet (general .NET usage):

using System;

class Program
{
    static void Main()
    {
        Console.WriteLine("Hello, World!");
    }
}

The Roslyn example demonstrates working with the compiler API to analyze code structure, while the dotnet example shows a typical .NET application entry point.

Pros of MAUI

• Focused on cross-platform UI development for mobile and desktop
• Provides a unified framework for building native UIs across multiple platforms
• Offers a rich set of pre-built UI controls and layouts

Cons of MAUI

• More specialized and narrower in scope compared to the broader .NET ecosystem
• May have a steeper learning curve for developers new to cross-platform development
• Limited to UI-centric applications, not suitable for all types of .NET projects

Code Comparison

MAUI (UI-focused):

public class MainPage : ContentPage
{
    public MainPage()
    {
        Content = new StackLayout
        {
            Children = { new Label { Text = "Hello, MAUI!" } }
        };
    }
}

.NET (General-purpose):

using System;

class Program
{
    static void Main()
    {
        Console.WriteLine("Hello, .NET!");
    }
}

The MAUI example demonstrates UI creation, while the .NET example shows a basic console application, highlighting the different focus areas of each repository.