Deprecate repeat(x)

[briancavalier]

It seems at best useless, and at worst dangerous :)

It's basically a continuous constant signal, but implemented as discrete events, which is problematic: infinitely many occurrences of x at infinitely small time intervals O.o ... it will happily blast out xs as fast as it possibly can.

Some better options might be:

1. Change repeat to take a time interval: repeat(period, value)
2. Change periodic to take a value (or an optional value, :/ )
3. Invent a new operation that takes a time interval and value

[unscriptable]

\4. rename repeat to blast 😄

Atm, I'm thinking that (2) is the right thing (without optional param). I may be totally off base, but I would imagine that the current event produced by period (arrival time in msec) is thrown out in most use cases.

Hrrrmmm... if somebody wants something similar, can they use most.timestamp()?

[briancavalier]

Atm, I'm thinking that (2) is the right thing (without optional param)

Hmm, yeah, actually option 2 isn't so bad. The parameter could be "required", which means you just get undefined if you leave it off.

I would imagine that the current event produced by period (arrival time in msec) is thrown out in most use cases

Yeah, I don't see the current time being all that useful either.

can they use most.timestamp()?

They can. It'd be slightly different in that they get a { value, time } object, but still, you're right: the point is that they can get the time if needed.

[briancavalier]

rename repeat to blast

Haha. Or how about incessantly(x)?

I do like periodic(period, value) very much. I've been thinking that there should also be a simple way to create a stream of a single, delayed value. That could be delayed(delay, value) which is a nice parallel to periodic(period, value).

[briancavalier]

For discussion/reference I modified periodic to take a value in the add-periodic-value branch. See 532fa80