3 ms·
Before we launched React we had a big discussion as whether we should change the name or not. React is completely different from everything that's called "react
by vjeux 12y ago
Before we launched React we had a big discussion as whether we should change the name or not. React is completely different from everything that's called "reactive programming" and we were afraid to cause confusion.
- tel 12y agoI personally find it causes a lot of confusion. Generally the term "reactive" has become very buzzwordy and meaningless if late. I think Meijer's talk just touches on the beginnings of it.
- Paradigma11 12y agoI know the stream based RX and several continuous/events based FRP implementations and their associated problems. Are there other interesting approaches?
- tel 12y agoI think my general feeling is that "there is no true reactive", but it's trendy to be responsive in that you have a system which behaves in soft or hard real time. There are a lot of components of such a system and lots of ways to organize it, but no clear feeling for which is best. At the end of the day it always feels like fighting between general purpose programming languages. Nobody can win, everyone optimizes for different things, and broad terms are useless except for marketing.
- seanmcdirmid 12y agoWell, there is also managed time. http://research.microsoft.com/apps/pubs/default.aspx?id=211297 http://research.microsoft.com/apps/pubs/default.aspx?id=2112... Constraint and logical systems like Bloom also qualify in dealing with change (the underlying meaning if "react"). The nice thing about FRP was that it went way beyond event streams, which is why Rx is so disappointing (which is just about event streams, react + Rx is sort of FRP).
- reflectiv 12y agoI always have to stop and check which 'react' something is talking about lately every time. From my perspective it is causing confusion...and I don't think I am alone.