Re: Highland vs. RxJS, RxJS operates at a lower level interface . As a plus for RxJS, Reactive Extensions are available for multiple languages, not just JS .
Another advantage is that many frameworks such as Angular 2.0 are shipping with support for Observables, so that's a huge win for users of RxJS that it automatically just works.
Just hazarding a guess.
In this case, there's also the problem that 'Stream' is already used by node.
Haha, well, your grandparent would like you to know that's no reason to avoid a particular name. Module system! ;)
> var BoringStream = require('stream');
> var Stream = require('highland');
> var $tream = require('highland');
Together in the same module. One can port one module at a time. It's what I do in my current job, each module can use a different set of technologies and we don't have to port everything at once.
Their use of _ actually made it easier for me to follow their examples.
It also makes users aware that the library is likely to cover aspects of the other, so they should carefully consider if they really want to include the new one.
Λ(['1', '2', '3'])
Windows: Alt+x 03BB
Linux: Ctrl+Shift+u 03BB (still pressing Ctrl+Shift)
Which is another way of saying that the examples in this doc are not very good, unfortunately.
> If you prefer using highland under the name _ like is done in the examples below, you can then simply use:
> var _ = highland
So it's not like you are required to use "_". And if it is a local variable, there is no risk of colliding with Underscore.
var _ = highland"
No. No, no, no. Goodness me.