Hi Tony,
Reactive so far has focused mainly on events and functions of time
(behaviors/signals), while Yampa on transformations between signals. I'm in
the process of building a higher-level interface with some semantic
similarity to the arrow/Yampa style. See recent posts at
http://conal.net/blog to get some flavor of where I'm going. The post "Why
classic FRP does not fit interactive behavior" in particular mentions part
of my motivation for doing something different from both classic FRP and
Yampa.
- Conal
2008/12/16 Tony Hannan
Hello,
Can someone describe the advantages and disadvantages of the Yampa library versus the Reactive library for functional reactive programming, or point me to a link.
Thanks, Tony
P.S. It is hard to google for Yampa and Reactive together because "reactive" as in "function reactive programming" always appears with Yampa
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe