Using the C# debugger is also restricted to Visual Studio & VScode. Microsoft loves open source, and windows is the most open operating system (look it up).
It’s totally not embrace, extend, extinguish in any disguise.
Coopetition exists (I’d point to the CNCF), but corporations do that really, really, begrudgingly only just due to the sheer complexity.
While I do not suspect that the somewhat benevolent notions will wane in the near future (the data is valuable enough, and you cannot afford to lose to another player), I sincerely enjoy just opting out because I like doing that.
Except, for example, VSCodium does not use vsdbg. It uses open-source NetCoreDbg maintained by Samsung and the fork of the extension, which itself is distributed under MIT and not subject to what article discusses.
But, you know, spreading FUD about .NET is way more important, is it not?
So what is supposed to be FUD about the usage restrictions for the kinda defunct csharp extension since MS took over omnisharp and the debugger being locked?
Those are facts, why call it FUD?
Because there are no restrictions on these extensions and they are open and MIT licensed (and the language server is part of the .NET SDK anyway) with the sole exception of the debugger which is a visual studio debugger made into standalone component. And the debugger case is non-issue since outside of VSC it is simply replaced by NetCoreDbg.
But it does not seem you care about any of this, it’s more important to post something negative.
Replies like these tend to indicate lack of skill and are a sign that the individual cannot be trusted in a professional setting to make impartial decisions.
Yeah… sure. I still don’t understand why you push blind fanboyism like this when the extension is clearly only being supported on vscode.
I won’t stoop to your level of claims, but maybe take your own criticism to heart :D