4 ms·
I agree with the essence of what you say. Rx trades off simple semantics for a simple implementation. Given the issues such as the above I think it is generally
by noelwelsh 11y ago
I agree with the essence of what you say. Rx trades off simple semantics for a simple implementation. Given the issues such as the above I think it is generally the wrong tradeoff. Simpler semantics do not require a great deal more work, as demonstrated by numerous other systems that have implemented them.
- lomnakkus 11y agoWhat are the "numerous other systems" that you had in mind? Links would be greatly appreciated!
- noelwelsh 11y agoSome alternatives are linked in the article. Other systems include FrTime / Flapjax (glitch-free push based systems in Racket and JS respectively), and the work on FRP.
- lomnakkus 11y agoWell, yes, but those don't seem objectively superior. They all have problems to do with it being too easy to accidentally introduce space leaks or time leaks... (At least as far as I recall. If there's some documentation/papers that suggest otherwise, please link!) EDIT: I should say: FRPNow! seems to have cracked a bit of this puzzle and Neel Krishnaswami had a recent-ish (2014?) paper on avoiding both space and time leaks with static checking, but I don't think we have anything approaching the mainstream, unfortunately.