The 2 New Web Application Types Added in .NET 8

Hello everybody, I'm Nick, and in this video, I will show you the two new types of web applications added in .NET 8. Both of them have to do with NativeAOT in some way, and in this video, I will explain what those types are and how they work. These types can be created with the CreateSlimBuilder and CreateEmptyBuilder methods.

Don't forget to comment, like and subscribe :)

Social Media:

#csharp #dotnet

[radekskl]

"Hey everybody I'm naked" - gets me every time

[mfsbo]

I think you should do performance comparison as its good candidate for few of us separating legacy functions into cheap custom single endpoint.

[ProfessorCodemunkie]

The Empty builder is quite cool. There's a big argument that .NET can be too "magic" at times and you don't know what's happening, so the ability to configure everything yourself and see exactly which features are being enabled is nice.

[matijs]

Great video as always!
Would totally like a video about the performance differences!

[MrRukat]

The performance difference comparison will be a cool stuff. Can't wait.

[wolle]

To answer your question at the end: I'd really like to see the improvements (i.e. benchmarks) of the empty or slim approach in terms of memory footprint and startup time as well (not only total performance) since I am working in a project building a docker based application where each service type runs at minimum in 2 instances. So money for the spent resources is an aspect for the customer.

[vinbtdb]

Would be nice to see a performance comparison between slimBuilder in a normal .NET application and a Native AOT application.

[BradJones-pdgv]

Thanks Nick, this is such a powerful feature. Definitely a performance video, would love to see how you measure the differences. It would also be interesting to see what impact there is on lambda cold start.

[paca]

nice, I am new in .NET (moved from js land) and I really like your content!

[SergeiFedorov]

It's difficult to express but when I started coding you had to add features that you knew how to code but now you have to know "what you can add" and now you can do it with just calling a method. In my opinion it has obfuscated a lot of the knowledge and also changed what is needed from a developer. The gain is +/- zero in total because the total amount of effort remains the same but the nature of the effort has changed. Yes, you can "get more" faster now but they way to "know" how to add new features has changed. It's like we've gone forward in so many areas but still made it no easier to come to the end result..

[IvanRandomDude]

Ok, so "Configuration over convention:" approach

[taylorkoepp]

I've always used nginx to handle https and a lot of endpoint configuration, having a slim builder will be very useful for me.

[umerkle]

I would not only be interested in a performance check, but also in a size comparison. If this is done to make AOT code smaller, how much difference would this mean when you build lets say a containerized AOT app? Also compared to single file compressed publish and different base images...

[CharlesBurnsPrime]

A native and dependent benchmark would be fascinating, perhaps with a simple GRPC service as the performance-conscious folks would love to hear that is even faster.

[cabiste]

We need a video about performance difference

[PontusWittenmark]

Looks like the team really wants to score well in those benchmarks :)

[HaoNguyen-kmxj]

The empty look nice, it require to know what we do in our application, no magic at all :)

[gregorymeadows]

Reminds me of one of the initial draws of .NET Core, less of what you don't need, but at the app instead of framework level.

Performance testing would be great, thanks!

[chunkbuffer]

What would be great is a gist of SlimBuilder that adds back everything the normal builder by default.

[ArgeKumadan]

I wonder how many requests per second it can handle with these new builders and native aot compilation.