How useful is it? Is it dying?

How useful is it? Is it dying?

Attached: download (4).png (318x159, 3.65K)

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_Patterns
twitter.com/AnonBabble

..

.

Not useful. Im dying.

>Im dying
Why?

>Not useful
Then what is the more appropriate alternative?

I hate this over engineered bullshit
It's too complicated for my small brain and balls

Then what's the proper alternative?

mobx

depends what you use it for
for model layer either futures or async
for ui layer just standard patterns like delegation or oberver

Is async really an alternative to Rx???

What's that and why/hoe is it better than Rx?

you don't need Rx, especially if you have async
Rx doesn't bring enough benefits with all of its compexity

If i'm not mistaken, ReactiveX was created by Microsoft for their .NET platform before it reaches Java and the JVM. They already had the async feature in .NET so, why did they create ReactiveX then if it's perfectly replace able by async?

because there's too much coursera coders who don't know about Gang of Four book and can't learn standard patterns

using Rx is the same as writing in Perl, you write it once and then no one understands how it works
especially it's nightmare to debug this shit

I dont get it. Async is easier than Rx. Dotnet had async. Microsoft felt the need to create Rx for their projects. So... They did it so that their software can be less readable and maintainable...?

rx makes it easier to implement patterns where you need to immediately react on data changes
I see it used a lot for UI such as Control Model bindings
so you don't need to implement Observer yourself, you can just write 2 lines of Rx and your shitty UI is now actually doing something

but it comes with making your code:
1. unpredictable
2. unreadable
3. undebuggable

so fuck rx and microsoft too
every fucking intern tries to sneak this crap in my codebase, and I have to teach them about the gang of four book

>Microsoft
>They did it so that their software can be less readable and maintainable...?

kek, who would've thought

What is that gang of four book? What principles does it teach?

So it's only good for UIs and not for the application/business model layer?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_Patterns

there's zero need for it in the model layer
it will reduce the amount of code in UI layer you need to write, but at the expense of the mentioned downsides

different teams may treat severity of those downsides differently, but I would argue they are fatal

>but I would argue they are fatal
Aren't you exaggerating a bit?

>it will reduce the amount of code in UI layer
More so than simple async?