Re:Rx glitches aren't actually a problem
by noelwelsh on Thursday December 17, 2015 @10:01AM
(#10751802)
I agree with the essence of what you say. Rx trades off simple semantics for a simple implementation. Given the issues such as the above I think it is generally the wrong tradeoff. Simpler semantics do not require a great deal more work, as demonstrated by numerous other systems that have implemented them.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Rx glitches aren't actually a problem
by lomnakkus on Thursday December 17, 2015 @11:01AM
(#10752202)
What are the "numerous other systems" that you had in mind? Links would be greatly appreciated!
Re:Rx glitches aren't actually a problem
by noelwelsh on Thursday December 17, 2015 @12:07PM
(#10752663)
Some alternatives are linked in the article. Other systems include FrTime / Flapjax (glitch-free push based systems in Racket and JS respectively), and the work on FRP.
Re:Rx glitches aren't actually a problem
by lomnakkus on Friday December 18, 2015 @02:48PM
(#10760529)
Well, yes, but those don't seem objectively superior. They all have problems to do with it being too easy to accidentally introduce space leaks or time leaks...
(At least as far as I recall. If there's some documentation/papers that suggest otherwise, please link!)
EDIT: I should say: FRPNow! seems to have cracked a bit of this puzzle and Neel Krishnaswami had a recent-ish (2014?) paper on avoiding both space and time leaks with static checking, but I don't think we have anything approaching the mainstream, unfortunately.