Juan-Carlos Gandhi (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
juan_gandhi) wrote2016-08-25 06:38 pm
juan_gandhi) wrote2016-08-25 06:38 pm
Entry tags:
scala futures critique
Decided to reread this:
http://docs.scala-lang.org/overviews/core/futures.html
"The most general form of registering a callback is by using the onComplete method, which takes a callback function of type Try[T] => U"
Guys, do you seriously think accepting a monad is a good solution? What is the type of your function? Well, it's a comonad, but I wonder if they know that.
"The callback is applied to the value of type Success[T] if the future completes successfully, or to a value of type Failure[T] otherwise."
Ever heard of XHR? They just have two functions, onsuccess and onerror. If you have a union, it's better to define a function on components.
Actually, they have it all. onSuccess, onFailure.
"The onComplete, onSuccess, and onFailure methods have result type Unit, which means invocations of these methods cannot be chained."
Oh. It's all so... not exactly wrong, but so misrepresented...
"This can be mind-boggling, but fortunately the flatMap operation is seldom used outside for-comprehensions, which are easier to use and understand."
Interesting. Which century was it?
"The recover combinator creates a new future which holds the same result as the original future if it completed successfully."
"The recoverWith combinator creates a new future which holds the same result as the original future if it completed successfully."
"The recoverWith combinator creates a new future which holds the same result as the original future if it completed successfully."
What a life!
"The andThen combinator is used purely for side-effecting purposes. It returns a new future with exactly the same result as the current future, regardless of whether the current future failed or not."
"we create a promise and use its future method to obtain the Future that it completes"
I remember reading it with almost an awe.
Now it all looks funny, like Ulysses - but Ulysses is actually funny, while this one is basically just a little bit sick. Is it not?
http://docs.scala-lang.org/overviews/core/futures.html
"The most general form of registering a callback is by using the onComplete method, which takes a callback function of type Try[T] => U"
Guys, do you seriously think accepting a monad is a good solution? What is the type of your function? Well, it's a comonad, but I wonder if they know that.
"The callback is applied to the value of type Success[T] if the future completes successfully, or to a value of type Failure[T] otherwise."
Ever heard of XHR? They just have two functions, onsuccess and onerror. If you have a union, it's better to define a function on components.
Actually, they have it all. onSuccess, onFailure.
"The onComplete, onSuccess, and onFailure methods have result type Unit, which means invocations of these methods cannot be chained."
Oh. It's all so... not exactly wrong, but so misrepresented...
"This can be mind-boggling, but fortunately the flatMap operation is seldom used outside for-comprehensions, which are easier to use and understand."
Interesting. Which century was it?
"The recover combinator creates a new future which holds the same result as the original future if it completed successfully."
"The recoverWith combinator creates a new future which holds the same result as the original future if it completed successfully."
"The recoverWith combinator creates a new future which holds the same result as the original future if it completed successfully."
What a life!
"The andThen combinator is used purely for side-effecting purposes. It returns a new future with exactly the same result as the current future, regardless of whether the current future failed or not."
"we create a promise and use its future method to obtain the Future that it completes"
I remember reading it with almost an awe.
Now it all looks funny, like Ulysses - but Ulysses is actually funny, while this one is basically just a little bit sick. Is it not?
no subject
Enjoyable read. Futures and Promises are a zoo in most languages. I have yet to find one I like in most situations. That said, I tried to implement it once by myself and failed miserably to meet all the goals. It is rather hard if you eye performance and flexibility simultaneously. But fun.
no subject
I’ve been using the technology since 2011, the CTP for VS2010 had a go live license.
no subject
https://www.quora.com/Is-isnt-it-grammatically-correct
Regarding implementing them, it probably takes some mental efforts to come up with a proper model. TLA, Pi-calculus, Actors Model... or just fork/join - these are the alternatives, I guess. Maybe more.
no subject
"Isn't it?" and "is it not?" are fine.
"It not it?" sounds awkward.
no subject
Интересно, откуда взялось, из какого учебника :-)
no subject
no subject
поискал, это что-то из 50-х годов, возможно тогда в Англии(?) так писали
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject