FRP is very similar in nature to FBP. (even the acronyms are similar) The main difference is in packaging. The original FBP systems were still 70s-style near-m

FRP is very similar in nature to FBP. (even the acronyms are similar) The main difference is in packaging. The original FBP systems were still 70s-style near-metal code within the component design, but the architecture described a protocol just sufficient for statically and asynchronously connecting the components together, and a runtime method that is amenable to the simplistic approach of having each component run round-robin until all return a "finished" signal. It's very much an "industrial engineering" perspective. FRP, on the other hand, comes from the traditions of functional programming, and so the evaluation order computation is given a more academic treatment, and the languages are given more explicit syntax, where FBP doesn't aim to describe itself much more deeply than the flowcharts. Both FRP and FBP have purity and immutability as core concepts. So as I see it: different starting point, different packaging, same conclusions.