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. > I will also say this fear of losing information is ignoring an important aspect of non-toy CSP systems. There are many cases where you absolutely have no choice - you must drop information (and preferably be able to specify how) if you do not want your program to fall apart. This is why Haskell has BoundedChan, Go has buffer backed channels, and why core.async is even more flexible about the dropping semantics. 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.
