Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 6 years ago.
Improve this question
I am evaluating reactor library for using it in our project. I googled a lot but couldn't find the difference(pros /cons) between Netflix's RxJava and Spring's Reactor API. can someone please help me in deciding or provide some pointers?
Thanks.
There isn't a single document that lists the pros and cons of RxJava versus Reactor. We don't see it being a mutually exclusive relationship. If you need the holistic Reactive approach of RxJava Observables, then use that and maybe add Reactor as a Scheduler implementation to get the high speed dispatching. If you're more interested in the functional, low-latency, lambda pipeline approach, then maybe choose Reactor as the foundation with the option to add Observables as the payload of objects passing through the Stream.
Each has its strengths and weaknesses and you just have decide, based on your understanding of what those are, what the final balance is. No one can tell you that and any attempt to do so would be disingenuous to say the least.
Related
Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 3 years ago.
Improve this question
I specifically intend to use the channel functionality of either language in developing a scalable web service. I am unclear at present about which one would be easier to implement but also which one would better fit the intended design, help maintain uptime, require minimal overhead etc.
I understand that the Go implementation uses CSP methodology, though I'm unclear exactly what the Rust implementation is based on and whether it is even analogous to the Go version.
Is there any similarity or are they too different to compare to each other?
Are there use-cases where both implementations would operate mostly the same?
There is no such thing as the Rust channel.
Whereas in Go channels are a language concept provided by the Go run-time, in Rust channels can be implemented in a library, and therefore there are as many channels implementations as there are libraries, each with different goals and trade-offs:
There is one MPSC (Multi-Producer, Single-Consumer) channel in the standard library.
There are MPMC (Multi-Producer, Multi-Consumer) channels in the crossbeam ecosystem and in the async-std crate1.
All of those implementations offer different interfaces, capabilities, and performance trade-offs.
1 Not an official crate, simply a port of std functionalities to async.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 2 years ago.
Improve this question
My programming knowledge is up to OOP since that was the last thing we covered in the university. However, I am taking 2 courses this summer and I am constantly under pressure, but I am planning to learn data structures along the way too, to be prepared for it next semester.
I had two plans to learn it but I am not sure which one will be more efficient:
-The first one is to skim through and learn about all the types of data structures and how they are implemented.
-The second one is to try instead of just reading and knowing about a data structure, I will go and try to implement it. However, the drawbacks are that its slow and time consuming, so I might not be able to learn all of the data structures in time
Practice using the data structures in your code.
Code those data structures from scratch.
Repeat steps 1 and 2.
There is really no shortcut for that.
Closed. This question needs details or clarity. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Add details and clarify the problem by editing this post.
Closed 4 years ago.
Improve this question
I am new to software engineering and also I like to learn whatever new. I must be very thankful if someone help me to provide further information about How is a UI evaluated?.
Any help regarding to this matter is highly appreciated.
In common, evaluation of User Interface can be based on three common elements
• Functionality
• Aesthetics
• Performance
Functionality
Is the application usable?
Does it enable users to complete tasks?
Aesthetics
Style
How it influencing the users
How shown and presented?
How colors complement each other?
How UI elements convey their meaning?
Performance
Measured not only by speed, but also reliability.
Reliability (Even though an application looks good and feels great, crashes repeatedly, it likely won’t be very successful)
Should provide a user with full confidence.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
while browsing for a contains method, I came across the following Q&A
contains-method-for-a-slice
It is said time and again in this Q&A that the method is really trivial to implement. What I don't understand is, if it were so easy to implement, and seeing how DRY is a popular software principle && and most modern languages implement said method , what sort of design reasoning could be involved behind the exclusion of such a simple method?
The triviality of the implementation depends on the scope of the implementation. It is trivial to implement when you know how to compare each value. Application code usually knows how to compare the types used in that application. But it is not trivial to implement in the general case for arbitrary types, and that is the situation for the language and standard library.
Figuring out if a slice contains a certain object is an O(n) operation where n is the length of the slice. This would not change if the language provided a function to do this. If your code relies on frequently checking if a slice contains a certain value, you should reevaluate your choice of data structures; a map is usually better in these kind of cases. Why should the standard library include functions that encourage you to use the wrong data structure for the task you have?
Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
I have seen in FHIR CI site there is a new split of current Careplan and specially their components in several new Resources (Careplan2, CareActivity, Goal, ...)
Really, this is good because monolithic Careplan is very heavy for Careplan editors, and Careplan schedulers. We are finishing a Careplan Editor and a Careplan scheduler and really it´s heavy to keep all of this info related in a careplan or only one resource, specially for searching Careplan activities.
We will be very interested for modifying our CarePlan editors and scheduler because we could get better management.
My questions are:
- will these experimental Care plan proposals substitute the current Care plan? is there some scheduled proposal for this?
- Which group is defining this for collaborate with them?
Thanks in advance
Regards
Discussions around the scope of care plan are on-going. The alternatives you've found are definitely experimental, and I don't know what their standing is in terms of the editorial process. I do think that in the end, some kind of unpackaging is more likely than not doing it, whether it's this or not.
The work is being carried out by the patient care work group and HL7 (http://www.hl7.org/Special/committees/patientcare/index.cfm) and you should subscribe to the group email list.