Timothy,
Yes, it has always been this way enforced with a strict grammar with
locking. The only place we don't care is in JavaScript, because we're
single threaded.
Matt
On Thursday, December 19, 2013 11:51:46 AM UTC-5, tbc++ wrote:
>
> You learn something new every day. As this always been t
You can easily do bi-directional communication using Rx, but it's involving
two Subjects, which are both Observables and Observers, or any flavor
thereof Subjects whether Replay, Async, Behavior, or Buffered or Controlled
(for backpressure coming soon).
var subject1 = new Rx.Subject();
var subj
You learn something new every day. As this always been the way that Rx
worked (the locking part)? I haven't used Rx for several years, so I may be
off in my assumptions.
Timothy
On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 9:41 AM, Matthew Podwysocki <
matthew.podwyso...@gmail.com> wrote:
> You can easily do bi-dir
On 12/17/13, 6:33 AM, Timothy Baldridge wrote:
I won't go so far as to tell you which is better as that often comes
down to a matter of taste. However, I will explain the technical
differences. In this case I'll use my (somewhat limited) knowledge of
C# Rx. Scala/Java's Rx may be different.
R
On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 5:33:10 AM UTC-8, tbc++ wrote:
>
> Core.Async on the other hand is based on two primitives: channels (queues)
> and processes. Errors are never propagated unless specified by the user.
> And thread pools/dispatchers are almost always required.
>
Seems like it's m
I won't go so far as to tell you which is better as that often comes down
to a matter of taste. However, I will explain the technical differences. In
this case I'll use my (somewhat limited) knowledge of C# Rx. Scala/Java's
Rx may be different.
Rx is based on a direct call. We could write a simple
Thought not specifically about Rx, this thread talks about core.async
and FRP (of which Rx is an implementation):
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/clojure/jHhwufCjrR8
--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Clojure" group.
To post to this group, se
Hello,
I seem to be a little bit confused when comparing core.async to the so
called Reactive Extensions (Rx). They seem to tackle similar problem of
async-icity, so I wonder what are the principal differences and in what
cases is one preferred over the other. Can someone please explain?
Regar
