Hi, thanks for replying. I only just created the library a few days ago, so I wouldn't say it is popular (yet) :-)
But if you have a project where you are already using RxJS and are already familiar with the operators, I think it has a low entry barrier.
So far it always drains to an array, so the only way to do that is
new Map(transducer(xxx)(yyy)) which has a performance penalty of first allocating the array.
You can't at the moment. But it is a good suggestion. I think I can solve both issues by allowing the transducer to produce a lazy iterable instead. I will look into that.
My apologies.
I assumed it was a not-even-recently-added part of the ancient RxJS behemoth.
Guess that's what I get for not clicking the I have written a transducer function link :)
I see this post was more of a camouflaged release announcement than a tutorial for an established package. 😉
I think that the line that sent me on this path the most was
RxJS will in fact process streams synchronously when possible
Hi, thanks for replying. I only just created the library a few days ago, so I wouldn't say it is popular (yet) :-)
But if you have a project where you are already using RxJS and are already familiar with the operators, I think it has a low entry barrier.
new Map(transducer(xxx)(yyy))which has a performance penalty of first allocating the array.Thanks for the feedback!
My apologies.
I assumed it was a not-even-recently-added part of the ancient RxJS behemoth.
Guess that's what I get for not clicking the I have written a transducer function link :)
I see this post was more of a camouflaged release announcement than a tutorial for an established package. 😉
I think that the line that sent me on this path the most was
Oh. I will make it more clear that this is a new library, and make it less camouflaged :-)