3 ms·
Maybe. Don't think any of this existed when I need it... 1. The code is tiny with 90% of it dealing with RSS parsing and filtering. Using RX.NET wouldn't reall
by olviko 10y ago
Maybe. Don't think any of this existed when I need it...
1. The code is tiny with 90% of it dealing with RSS parsing and filtering. Using RX.NET wouldn't really simplify anything.
2. I wanted a library that I can integrate into my apps and run locally to avoid throttling, robots.txt and other BS Yahoo Pipes was suffering from.
I am also not a huge fan of RX... to put it mildly
- rubber_duck 10y agoI think I've used Rx way back when in 2009 (there was no TPL in silverlight so you had to use callbacks and events for continuations which was insane, so I used Rx) so it's been around. Mind sharing why you don't like it ? I personally like how it allows me to express complex high level operations cleanly. For example - I have a observable configuration variable that can come from different sources and the source change dynamically. I need to listen to latest source until a new one becomes active - in Rx I only need to push the new source trough IObservable<IObservable<ConfigurationValue>> and then use http://reactivex.io/documentation/operators/switch.html http://reactivex.io/documentation/operators/switch.html which returns IObservable<ConfigurationValue> which will push values from the latest source - Rx will handle unsubscribing from previous active source, synchronizing state and making sure everything is thread safe. And there are a bunch of operators like this that would be tedious and hard implement correctly with all the edge cases in a thread safe way - and here they are abstracted in to high level operators.