Re: Comparing core.async and Reactive Extensions

2013-12-19 Thread Matthew Podwysocki
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

Re: Comparing core.async and Reactive Extensions

2013-12-19 Thread Matthew Podwysocki
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

Re: Comparing core.async and Reactive Extensions

2013-12-19 Thread Timothy Baldridge
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

Re: Comparing core.async and Reactive Extensions

2013-12-17 Thread Ben Mabey
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

Re: Comparing core.async and Reactive Extensions

2013-12-17 Thread Brian Craft
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

Re: Comparing core.async and Reactive Extensions

2013-12-17 Thread Timothy Baldridge
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

Re: Comparing core.async and Reactive Extensions

2013-12-17 Thread Leonardo Borges
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