3 ms·

Are those really that different? Sure, the manifesto spends more time showcasing the benefits of a reactive system than explaining how it works, and that explan

Are those really that different? Sure, the manifesto spends more time showcasing the benefits of a reactive system than explaining how it works, and that explanation takes the form of an event-based view. But event propagation ''is'' a way to transfer change throughout a system built on data flows, so it fits the definition of the reactive parading. In doing so, the manifesto could be seen as a particular way to realize RP, a subset of a larger concept. Am I missing something? Why do you consider they don't have anything in common but the name?

pron 13y ago
Because reactive programming is a pretty specific (though not overly specific) programming paradigm, while the manifesto talks about ideals in software design. You can achieve these ideals with or without reactive programming, and you can use reactive programming without aiming for those ideals. Both are nice, but they're two different things.
- mattcarkci 13y ago
  How do you define reactive programming?
  - pron 13y ago
    As a model in which you define dependencies among different changing variables, and any change in the value of a variable – which can happen at any time, even concurrently with other variable updates – triggers the re-computation of all dependent values.
the_af 13y ago
To be honest I'm not even sure what reactive programming means. I took the Reactive Programming course from Coursera, by Odersky, Kuhn & Meijer, and in the forums Kuhn explicitly said it's not functional reactive programming. I'll admit I'm confused by the relationship between FRP, RP and Akka's brand of RP. The only thing I'm certain is that Akka's RP != FRP. The assignments from the course were full of side-effects, mutability and global variables.
- seanmcdirmid 13y ago
  Rx is not FRP, for sure, but even most impure FRP systems (like flapjax) are not really FRP given a pure definition. "Reactive" is quite vague. The earliest programming systems labelled "reactive" were meant for expressing low level real time control behavior, but these days the word could just as well be related to UI or enterprise/web data processing (note, that the above projects don't really help with UI, they are more for the latter!).

pron 13y ago

Because reactive programming is a pretty specific (though not overly specific) programming paradigm, while the manifesto talks about ideals in software design. You can achieve these ideals with or without reactive programming, and you can use reactive programming without aiming for those ideals. Both are nice, but they're two different things.

mattcarkci 13y ago
How do you define reactive programming?
- pron 13y ago
  As a model in which you define dependencies among different changing variables, and any change in the value of a variable – which can happen at any time, even concurrently with other variable updates – triggers the re-computation of all dependent values.

the_af 13y ago

To be honest I'm not even sure what reactive programming means. I took the Reactive Programming course from Coursera, by Odersky, Kuhn & Meijer, and in the forums Kuhn explicitly said it's not functional reactive programming. I'll admit I'm confused by the relationship between FRP, RP and Akka's brand of RP. The only thing I'm certain is that Akka's RP != FRP. The assignments from the course were full of side-effects, mutability and global variables.

seanmcdirmid 13y ago
Rx is not FRP, for sure, but even most impure FRP systems (like flapjax) are not really FRP given a pure definition. "Reactive" is quite vague. The earliest programming systems labelled "reactive" were meant for expressing low level real time control behavior, but these days the word could just as well be related to UI or enterprise/web data processing (note, that the above projects don't really help with UI, they are more for the latter!).