[apozem]

The operator chains remind me of RxJS. Which is great! I love reactive programming. But speaking as someone who spent two years teaching RxJS to a team of frontend newbies, the learning curve is brutal.

(Please do not reply with "I found RxJS easy". Good for you.)

[nwienert]

I once used RxJS for a dev tool platform, we had a use case where we had to take a tree-like structure of user data and recursively resolve all the async nodes.

Took it to the RxJS discord after a couple days of pounding my head on it. One of the creators was there and was super helpful.

We went back and forth on the problem at least 6 times each, with new attempts. He tried quite a few variations, but none ever worked.

[LoganDark]

> (Please do not reply with "I found RxJS easy". Good for you.)

What about "what makes it hard"? I've never tried RxJS before, so I'm curious to know where the learning curve is.

[apozem]

The team I was teaching struggled with the concept of streams and reactivity. It's kind of like programming backwards, especially if you're used to an imperative mindset. They just had a hard time with the concept of a stream.

They also had a tough time remembering all the operators in the library.

[LoganDark]

Hmm, I suppose I can see your point. When doing reactive things you have to think "what should this depend on". When doing imperative things you have to think "what depends on this that I need to remember to update". I always found reactive programming to be easier to reason about generally, but I suppose if someone's stuck in an imperative mindset it can be difficult to pick up reactivity.