Took me a month to write 3000 words on the topic. Hope y'all enjoy it (:
-
-
Show this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
i want to quote this: "the stream pipeline will only yield data if it's requested for. This is commonly referred to as "lazy iteration", or "streams with backpressure, Currently there's no dedicated syntax to loop through streams" are there is any RFC for `for..await` syntax ?
-
Hah, yeah no there isn't an RFC for that yet! The lang team is busy getting async/await over the finish line first. From conversations I've had with folks it seems like `for await` might be a while as it relies on several other features landing first (e.g. const generics).
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Why do "through" needs to produce new data? Can't it operate in passthrough (zero-copy) or modify the data in-place ?
-
Oh yeah, it definitely can! Sorry if my phrasing was vague there; what you're saying is on point (:
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I wonder if it would make sense to call the ‘Stream’ trait ‘AsyncIterator’ instead. For the sake of consistency with ‘AsyncRead’/‘AsyncWrite’ and because streams in other languages (e.g. Java) aren’t necessarily async at all. I’d like to paint this bike-shed yak-colored.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Very helpful overview, thanks! "Which begs the question if this amount of complexity is actually worth it": no, it raises the question; begging it is a rare logical fallacy. Or actually ask: "Is this amount of complexity actually worth it?"
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.