What's that syntax at 8:00? Why is he not using `{error: (err) => {...}}` ?It's obvious that `{error(err) {...}}` would work, but how is this syntax called? It looks more like a class/method declaration than an object? Is that also part of destructuring?
Just a convention, It is from cycle.js .. cycle.js.org/basic-examples.html#basic-examples-increment-a-counter-what-is-the-convention I prefer just to call something an observable.
Don’t you think it is a bad practice to introduce functions that aren’t scoped to a class like the new “of” function. If every library creator followed your example it would make a mess of name collisions and forced aliases. At least when you hang these functions off a class it reduces the name collisions to just class names? “of” seams like one of those names that is almost certainly going to become a keyword in the future. Hanging these functions off a class also helps the developer with intellisense instead of having to memorize the names of this function soup. Again, this might not be so bad if this is done with one library, but if we all followed your pattern, the javascript ecosystem would certainly be worse off.
Great talk, thanks! RxJS is awesome! :)
What's that syntax at 8:00? Why is he not using `{error: (err) => {...}}` ?It's obvious that `{error(err) {...}}` would work, but how is this syntax called? It looks more like a class/method declaration than an object? Is that also part of destructuring?
At 6:13, the video shows badSource$.subscribe(...). Is badSource an object name and why does it have the $ symbol?
Just a convention, It is from cycle.js .. cycle.js.org/basic-examples.html#basic-examples-increment-a-counter-what-is-the-convention
I prefer just to call something an observable.
Seems to be called Finnish notation .. medium.com/@benlesh/observables-and-finnish-notation-df8356ed1c9b
Excellent !
Amazing talk, thanks!
but does igor do handstand pushups?
Where can I get the slide theme? The mac like UI look is cool!
Where are the docs for v6 located?
very good!
You're not exclaiming the most important note: Don't update dependencies in production unless you absolutely have to.
Don’t you think it is a bad practice to introduce functions that aren’t scoped to a class like the new “of” function. If every library creator followed your example it would make a mess of name collisions and forced aliases. At least when you hang these functions off a class it reduces the name collisions to just class names? “of” seams like one of those names that is almost certainly going to become a keyword in the future. Hanging these functions off a class also helps the developer with intellisense instead of having to memorize the names of this function soup. Again, this might not be so bad if this is done with one library, but if we all followed your pattern, the javascript ecosystem would certainly be worse off.
IMHO, "observe" instead of "of" would be better, more descriptive and would make less potential collissions. Said that, good work team!
import { of: whateverYouWannaCallIt } from 'rxjs';