Yeah, in my original post I already pointed out that Reactive Streams is a proposed standard but not an implementation.
My proposal was to go with RxJava 1.0 + the Reactive Streams adapter ( https://github.com/ReactiveX/RxJavaReactiveStreams) for now, as that would allow users to benefit from things like Hystrix whose base is RxJava 1.0, while keeping their code future-proof for when RxJava 2.0 is released with a native RS interface. Thanks for chiming in. Raúl. On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 1:35 PM, akarnokd <akarn...@gmail.com> wrote: > I'd definitely go on a Reactive-Streams path (although I don't know what > Apache Ignite does), however, there seems to be a small confusion around > RS. > RS is a set of 4 interfaces and practically unusable on its own. One needs > a > library built around it such as Project Reactor, Akka Streams and RxJava > 2.0. Such library, likely, will also slip into the API itself due to its > usefulness. > > For example, the following API is inconvenient to use but is definitely > cutting-edge: > > Publisher<Data> getData(); > > but you can only subscribe to it in its plain form or wrap it with one of > the libraries: > > Observable.fromPublisher(getData()).map().filter().group()... > > I'm not sure about the others, but RxJava 2.0 Observable (which later may > be > renamed to Flowable) implement Publisher directly, therefore, the following > getData() may return an RxJava Observable and still be consumable via > Reactor or Akka (after wrapping/fluent-conversion, of course): > > getData().to(Streams::from).dispatchOn(...) > > Although I'm pretty confident that RxJava 2.0 works right now, it is still > considered alpha and based on past experience with its gatekeepers, it may > take 6-12 months until an official release comes out. > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Brainstorming-about-Reactive-Streams-tp3346p3422.html > Sent from the Apache Ignite Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >
