On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 10:00 AM, bertschi <nils.bertschin...@googlemail.com>wrote:
> Whereas the first example receives all incremented values, the second one > receives potentially less since both consumers read from the very same > input channel! This also means that one can break working code, by > (accidently) attaching an additional consumer ... note that in Rx I can > subscribe as many times as I want to an observable without any effect on > the rest of the data flow. > Which also creates a resource problem as a result of the subscription side effect. You can build subscription based on Rx over core.async if you like, but I think it's more of a tradeoff than people realize. > Maybe I'm misunderstanding CSP and how it allows to compose and > synchronize processes, but somehow I feel that channels complect the idea > of state varying values and identity. Regarding that referential > transparency, which is required for equational reasoning, is one of the > best properties of purely functional programs, breaking it seems to be at > least problematic > Problematic in what real sense? Haskell provides similar facilities over the Chan data type. Clearly they also believe it's useful to model problems in this way. David -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
