“Rxjs is not dead it’s just optional” is such a great line to take by the #angular team. Definitely won’t rock the boat. Not that they will ever mention it again once it’s optional. It has held back the framework for years, to the point where it may not recover. - ThreadSky

chryder.bsky.social • 30 days ago

“Rxjs is not dead it’s just optional” is such a great line to take by the #angular team. Definitely won’t rock the boat. Not that they will ever mention it again once it’s optional. It has held back the framework for years, to the point where it may not recover.

Comments

chevdeseingalt.bsky.social•30 days ago

I wouldn’t say that unqualified like that. It definitely offers immense capabilities, not remotely matched by anything else I’ve seen. But it IS hard to learn, and harder still to master.

chryder.bsky.social•30 days ago

Perhaps I’m being overly dramatic, but many a budding developer will have left Angular at the precise point where some guidance or other suggested they had to unsubscribe from HttpClient explicitly. I know I wavered.

chevdeseingalt.bsky.social•30 days ago

It’s definitely one of the more challenging aspects of Angular, and Signals are much more fun. That said, I know I’d miss RxJs if they completely removed it.

It’s like a biscuit joiner: you don’t need it often, but when you do, few things serve the purpose as well.

chevdeseingalt.bsky.social•29 days ago

BTW, one thing Angular needs to address with Signals is temporal behavior, i.e., "this happens AND THEN this happens", such as when you want to debounce or set up a series of events that occur in sequence.

pkozlowski.bsky.social•29 days ago

Actually, this one of the thing that we very much do NOT want to address with signals - this is because signals are not meant to model those (eventing) situations.

This requires adjustment in thinking but a reactive graph should describe relation between data and not a sequence of events.

chevdeseingalt.bsky.social•29 days ago

Fair enough, but that guarantees that RxJs will be around forever, and makes zoneless less achievable for many, possibly most, apps.

chryder.bsky.social•29 days ago

100%. We tried to move an RXJS merge with debounce to signals but had to revert back. Perhaps that was the biscuit joiner case you mentioned before.

chevdeseingalt.bsky.social•29 days ago

Yeah, you’d have to do a toObservable() on your source signal, piper that to debounceTime(), and then convert the result back with toObservable(), and I don’t even know for sure if that would work.

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply