Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Reactive Streams for the JVM hits 1.0.0

reactive-streams.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–18 of 18 posts

Re: Reactive Streams for the JVM hits 1.0.0

#11

Post by javajosh »

This is a great vision, but without trying to be a jerk, I have to wonder: isn't this just a restatement of what Erlang/OTP has been doing for at least 20 years? I haven't learned the language yet, so it's a serious question.

And if you want "Erlang validation" it's hard to beat WhatsApp's $19B acquisition. (I doubt that Facebook will be releasing any open source Erlang code any time soon!)

So what's the deal? If you believe in the http://www.reactivemanifesto.org/ wouldn't you be better off just biting the bullet and learning http://www.erlang.org/?

Re: Reactive Streams for the JVM hits 1.0.0

#12

Post by ubertaco »

javajosh wrote: post #11

This is a great vision, but without trying to be a jerk, I have to wonder: isn't this just a restatement of what Erlang/OTP has been doing for at least 20 years? I haven't learned the language yet, so it's a serious question. And if you want "Erlang validation" it's hard to beat WhatsApp's $19B acquisition. (I doubt that Facebook will be releasing any open source Erlang code any time soon!) So what's the deal? If you…

This is good for existing-Java ecosystems. Not everyone can just up and full-rewrite into a new language!

Re: Reactive Streams for the JVM hits 1.0.0

#13

Post by dmeb »

javajosh wrote: post #11

This is a great vision, but without trying to be a jerk, I have to wonder: isn't this just a restatement of what Erlang/OTP has been doing for at least 20 years? I haven't learned the language yet, so it's a serious question. And if you want "Erlang validation" it's hard to beat WhatsApp's $19B acquisition. (I doubt that Facebook will be releasing any open source Erlang code any time soon!) So what's the deal? If you…

I haven't used erlang - that said, one reason might be that it's dynamically typed by default, and that the extensions for a type system have had mixed success:

"Phil Wadler and Simon Marlow worked on a type system for over a year and the results were published in [20]. The results of the project were somewhat disappointing. To start with, only a subset of the language was type-checkable, the major omission being the lack of process types and of type checking inter-process messages."

http://learnyousomeerlang.com/types-or-lack-thereof#for-type...

Re: Reactive Streams for the JVM hits 1.0.0

#14

Post by panic »

javajosh wrote: post #11

This is a great vision, but without trying to be a jerk, I have to wonder: isn't this just a restatement of what Erlang/OTP has been doing for at least 20 years? I haven't learned the language yet, so it's a serious question. And if you want "Erlang validation" it's hard to beat WhatsApp's $19B acquisition. (I doubt that Facebook will be releasing any open source Erlang code any time soon!) So what's the deal? If you…

What does this have to do with Erlang? As far as I know, Erlang doesn't have a concept of a "stream" nor any particular mechanism for handling back-pressure.

Re: Reactive Streams for the JVM hits 1.0.0

#15

Post by dikaiosune »

ubertaco wrote: post #12
javajosh wrote: post #11

This is a great vision, but without trying to be a jerk, I have to wonder: isn't this just a restatement of what Erlang/OTP has been doing for at least 20 years? I haven't learned the language yet, so it's a serious question. And if you want "Erlang validation" it's hard to beat WhatsApp's $19B acquisition. (I doubt that Facebook will be releasing any open source Erlang code any time soon!) So what's the deal? If you…

This is good for existing-Java ecosystems. Not everyone can just up and full-rewrite into a new language!

More importantly, these kinds of developments bring the features of hipper, HN-popular languages to the multitude of enterprise Java devs who will likely never be approved to write anything in Erlang, green field project or not.

It's always a good thing when a mainstream language gets better - it positively impacts a lot more people who don't get to use niche languages for their work.

EDIT: My grammar and spelling suck first thing in the morning.

Re: Reactive Streams for the JVM hits 1.0.0

#16

Post by fanstatic »

v1.0.0#specification reads: > Or another implementation could fuse the operations to the final consumer: > nioSelectorThreadOrigin | map(f) filter(p) consumeTo(toNioSelectorOutput)

Having control over how to fuse a chain of functions is very interesting. Do any of the implementations allow use of mutable state when fusing a chain of functions with the same signature.

Re: Reactive Streams for the JVM hits 1.0.0

#17

Post by CountHackulus »

igor-tn wrote: post #9
CountHackulus wrote: post #8

While this looks very interesting, and I'll probably push for using it in production shortly, I can't help but wonder what some of their marketing talk even means. non-blocking back pressure How does that even relate? All I can think of is sticking a potato into a car exhaust.

That's not a marketing talk but an important technical term instead. See this for a quick reference: https://github.com/ReactiveX/RxJava/wiki/Backpressure . It is important to understand before even thinking about using reactive streams in production.

It is absolutely marketing talk, there's other established terms for what that means but they elected to make up other terms. Perhaps they should take the lesson from this talk where they explicitly break down this exact term and explain what they REALLY mean in common terms.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pOl4E8x3fmw

Re: Reactive Streams for the JVM hits 1.0.0

#18

Post by rtb »

CountHackulus wrote: post #17
igor-tn wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not a marketing talk but an important technical term instead. See this for a quick reference: https://github.com/ReactiveX/RxJava/wiki/Backpressure . It is important to understand before even thinking about using reactive streams in production.

It is absolutely marketing talk, there's other established terms for what that means but they elected to make up other terms. Perhaps they should take the lesson from this talk where they explicitly break down this exact term and explain what they REALLY mean in common terms. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pOl4E8x3fmw

> there's other established terms for what that means

Please could you expand on this?

Post reply on HN