|
|
|
|
|
by glassx
4382 days ago
|
|
When you say that he's mocking Microsoft engineers, is that because of the Visual Basic comments? Because Erik actually enjoys VB and was responsible for adding some features to it. He's a former employee, so there's context... And I don't think he's being dismissive of reactive programming, he's dismissive of that definition, which is too broad. He was one of the main proponents of Reactive programming inside Microsoft. |
|
"In Redmond, like a lot of people talk about code but don't write it, so I think Microsoft can only come back if, you know, they start writing more code."
> And I don't think he's being dismissive of reactive programming, he's dismissive of that definition, which is too broad.
The definition seems pretty reasonable to me. It immediately resonated with me; it described a principle I had been trying to achieve in some code I was writing recently. The idea of having changes automatically propagate through your model as a data-flow network is a pretty noticeable contrast to other ways of programming.
> He was one of the main proponents of Reactive programming inside Microsoft.
Yeah I guess I don't have this context. But without it, the talk just rubbed me wrong.