First crack at a Streams proposal

Tab Atkins Jr. jackalmage at
Mon Apr 15 16:49:48 PDT 2013

On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 4:43 PM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt <samth at> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 7:35 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage at> wrote:
>>> It should also be made clear how and when a stream may emit values. Whether
>>> it is at any arbitrary time and it will send to whomever is listening at
>>> that moment. Whether it is only allowed to emit values after a listen call.
>>> Does every call to listen get the entire history independently of other
>>> calls? (Doing so would buffer all data and defeat the point of a stream).
>>> What happens when you push a value into the resolved and no-one is
>>> listening?
>> By virtue of not defining this, I implicitly answered your questions.
> This really isn't right. Jake's questions were the first questions I
> had about your design.  It defines a lot of the methods, but it leaves
> out the *most* important part of the design, which is the semantics.
> Can you please try to make this precise sooner rather than later in
> this discussion?

Please note the fact that the quoted sentence was followed by a
smilie, and an actual answer to his question.  ^_^

I'm clarifying my blog post as we speak with some of the feedback from
this thread.


More information about the es-discuss mailing list