4 ms·
ah, thanks for the explanation... I guess we probably need a "new_cool_term" namespace for every new/re-purposed term. Simply use "reactive" to refer to "async"
by fredliu 11y ago
ah, thanks for the explanation... I guess we probably need a "new_cool_term" namespace for every new/re-purposed term. Simply use "reactive" to refer to "async" already caused a name collision for me here....
- oldmanjay 11y agoIt's not a direct replacement for asynchronous, as reactive implies quite a different set of semantics. The collision is only in your misunderstanding of the pattern. The jargon is meaningful, not marketing.