(2012/04/19 7:32), Daniel Bünzli wrote:
Yes because the semantics of [e] is violated, it has three values at the same
time, the current value during the update cycle, the value 1 and the value 2.
Now suppose I reason about the semantics of [e] in this program, it has a
well-defined outcome
Thank you for helping me understand with your explanation.
Your event semantics has two invariant.
1. for all e, t : occurrence of [e] at time [t] is one or zero.
2. if primitive [e] is occurred in time [t], update cycle runs in time [t].
Do you have any experience to proof a theorem
(2012/04/19 19:57), Daniel Bünzli wrote:
Le jeudi, 19 avril 2012 à 12:31, Daniel Bünzli a écrit :
If P1 occurs then you start walking back from L, but you don't know where P1 is
so you have to walk down every branch until you find P1 and then walk back from
there up to L to make the update.
(2012/04/18 2:52), Adrien wrote:
I haven't been able to take more than a close look at PEC but I'm
interested in it (in particular for the ability to send values to
events during the update cycle).
Thank you for your interest in my library.
I've noticed EventSig.scan: val scan : ('a - 'b -
Hello,
(2012/04/18 4:23), Daniel Bünzli wrote:
- PEC's update cycle is separated from sending events.
You can send a value to event during update cycle.
What's the semantics if you send two different values to an event during an
update cycle ?
They fires two different event if you send two
Hello,
I'd like to announce the release of PEC, a push style event combinator.
PEC : https://github.com/osiire/Pec
This small module(about 350 LOC) provides
- a composable event.
- map, choose, never, join and several useful functions.
- immediate reactions corresponds sending data to
