Does runtime async mean stackful coroutines? It's not obvious what exactly the state machines are replaced by, if not automatically inserted yield() calls.

I took it to mean that coroutines are still stackless but that yielding is now an operation the runtime knows about instead of being compiled out by the compiler.

Awesome stuff, as usual in .NET releases! The runtime async support is surprising to me... I get that stack traces are more friendly without state machines in the code, but I didn't expect they could switch to a runtime version and have equivalent performance. Cool!

They did that after the learnings with experiment of having a Erlang, Go, Java like implementation for async, await.

Is this a joke, like "hen's teeth"? Those languages don't have async/await.

No joke at all, not that I said "like implementation", not that they have async/await.

https://github.com/dotnet/runtimelab/issues/2398

Be sure to read all the way to the bottom,

For the features that overlap between golang and .Net, can someone please let me know why people choose .Net over golang for non legacy systems? As far as my limited knowledge goes, go is much more efficient in syntax and memory.

The tooling and development UX.

Put things like their remote debugging experiences side-by-side and you will quickly learn why some of us go for the Microsoft tools rather than the others.

Go isn't as much fun. And is usually slower for my work until I bump up the GC and then it uses roughly the same amount of memory.

I have also found c# async to be lighter than go's concurrency story, and dotnet11 is going to make that much more clear.

Now: I write software for fun, not for money.

So for a requirement where both golang and .net would suffice, would you choose .Net over golang?

Yes. Unless I really need CSP, but then I would much rather use f#+hopac because CML is the bee's knees.

For general concurrency where async doesn't suffice, go is nicer than C#, but hopac is nicer than go.

If go had proper concurrentML I am pretty sure I would use go a lot more. Again: this is for hobby projects where I get to choose freely.

Go is not much more efficient, compared to NativeAOT - though it can be faster in some areas. The big reason why someone would want to use C# is that it's a more expressive language. You can even write your DB queries with LINQ (C# lets you express code as data), making them type-safe.

At former jobs, because people know it and switching from .Net <-> Go generally isn't worth the time to learn other language.

Sure, having a runtime is downside but difference in container size for your average CRUD App doesn't really matter. Performance IME is very similar.

Ops type here.

That is an urban myth, CLR was designed with support for C++ in mind.

Also Go is at the stage of C# .NET 2.0, and still plenty of lacking language features.

I really think the creator of C# made a disservice to the .NET community by picking Go for the Typescript rewrite.

I know it's not quite as important in the agentic world, but the .NET tooling (across Visual Studio, JetBrains Rider, and C# Dev Kit for VS Code) is just awesome. Some people might frown upon full-blown IDEs, but sometimes they're just incredibly handy.

Native interop is much better in .NET, that matters a lot for some systems.

What's go's equivalent of LINQ?

I am looking forward to async stack traces being more legible. It might encourage developers to actually read and use them.