Clarify customer intent and enhance file-based apps description

[AdmiralSnyder]

Updated customer intent description for clarity and added a reference to directives.

Summary

Describe your changes here.

Fixes #Issue_Number (if available)

---

Internal previews

📄 File	🔗 Preview link
docs/csharp/fundamentals/tutorials/file-based-programs.md	Tutorial: Build file-based C# programs

[AdmiralSnyder]

Here's an additional question. in the document, it's stated that dotnet run has to be used to execute file based projects. iirc, in dotnetconf it was demoed that dotnet myfile.cs was sufficient - shouldn't that be what is recommended in this beginner tutorial (since it removes (unnecessary) console input?

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

This PR makes two small improvements to the file-based programs tutorial: corrects a grammar issue in the customer intent metadata comment (adding "to" before "build"), and enhances the description by adding a cross-reference link to the preprocessor directives documentation where shebang directives are mentioned.

Key Changes

• Fixed grammar in customer intent comment: "I want build" → "I want to build"
• Added cross-reference link to preprocessor directives documentation for the shebang directives mention

[BillWagner]

Here's an additional question. in the document, it's stated that dotnet run has to be used to execute file based projects. iirc, in dotnetconf it was demoed that dotnet myfile.cs was sufficient - shouldn't that be what is recommended in this beginner tutorial (since it removes (unnecessary) console input?

Yes, dotnet myfile.cs is now sufficient. (That's the price of working with previews. @AdmiralSnyder Do you want to add that update to this PR?

[BillWagner]

Hi @AdmiralSnyder

What you've written in this PR is fine, and ready to merge. Did you want to add the text about dotnet myfile.cs, or should I make an issue to handle that change in another PR?

I'm happy with either choice, I just want to know if I should leave this open or merge it. Thanks.

[AdmiralSnyder]

sorry @BillWagner i thought about it but forgot to actually respond.
i think changing documentation from
dotnet run myfile.cs
to
dotnet myfile.cs
should be a concerted effort touching all the places at once
which i could imagine is a pain when you only use the github web UI (and is more than i have time right now, sadly)

So creating a separate issue for that would be the correct thing to do, imo.

Speaking about creating issues for documentations? can i please get the right to do that? :-) pretty please.

[BillWagner]

@AdmiralSnyder

Speaking about creating issues for documentations? can i please get the right to do that? :-) pretty please.

This will vary by repository. The repos in the dotnet GitHub org almost all accept issues publicly. The exception are some repos for API docs where the source of truth is the product source. (For example, the roslyn-api-docs repo doesn't accept issues because the roslyn source has the triple slash comments).

In general, on all our docs, you'll see a link to create a docs issue. That link opens a template that makes adds reference links to the article for us:

Thanks again.

[BillWagner]

This LGTM and I'll now.