3 ms·
> "this new thing called Reactive Programming" Let's take an age-old paradigm and present it as something new... why, I don't know, maybe so we can come across
by fnord77 9y ago
> "this new thing called Reactive Programming"
Let's take an age-old paradigm and present it as something new... why, I don't know, maybe so we can come across as an expert on something "new" and high-tech for fame and fortune...
...at least until someone who has been around the block comes along and figures out you're at best a bullshit artist and at worst completely ignorant and unqualified to be presenting...
- draw_down 9y agoOh, stop.
- adamnemecek 9y agoOk where did you write reactive back in the day?
- mathgladiator 9y agoI don't think it was called reactive back in the day, but the ideas are old to some degree. If you drop the functional aspects, then "Reactive" programming goes back to Lotus 123 (for the those too young, think Excel). Data base triggers is also "Reactive", and materialized views are also "reactive". Are there some novel aspects to "FRP", sure.
- adamnemecek 9y agoAnd OS interrupts are also reactive?
- TuringTest 9y agoCan you compose incoming OS interrupts?
- jcelerier 9y agoIn languages such as Esterel, Lustre, and Signal, in the late 80s
- suprfnk 9y agoI think that line is aimed towards people new to all this stuff, hearing "functional reactive programming" being thrown around. The author does seem to know the 'roots', if you can call it that: "Reactive programming is programming with asynchronous data streams. In a way, this isn't anything new. Event buses or your typical click events are really an asynchronous event stream, on which you can observe and do some side effects. [..]"