> To me, I feel like this would best be implemented as part of Actor model > concurrency – taking inputs and emitting outputs is fundamentally what Actors > *do*.
Yes, I think some form of ‘reactive stream’ could be a prerequisite for the Actor model (an not the other way around). > As for naming... I would *not* recommend using `Flow` it is far too generic, > has been used in very different contexts and doesn't match terminology in the > field. On the contrary, it’s not overloaded at all. It is used in related concepts like DataFlow, ‘flow-based’ programming, etc. Also, from the dictionary: flow, noun a steady, continuous stream or supply of something. sounds like a great synonym for the (reserved?) stream name. > My personal vote is that this topic simply can't be addressed by the standard > library at this point. This is something where interoperability with Swift's > Actor Model should be a primary concern and until it's done, any action now > is only likely to be a headache later. I think this is a central concept that among other things is useful in concurrency. It should be tackled sooner rather than later. -g.
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
