eslint-plugin-unicorn VS proposal-observable

XO. This feels like the Black of Typescript linting. XO has styles for everything and is very opinionated. This can be nice, because it takes a lot of code style decisions off of your plate. But beware it can be cumbersome to implement in the middle of a project because it will require extensive reformatting. In lieu of XO, I found Unicorn opinionated enough and more immediately useful.

Recently, we chose to add the Unicorn plugin, which contain dozens of ESlint rules. It can feel overwhelming at first because it triggers hundreds of errors. Fortunately, we discovered eslint-nibble: a command line tool that helps adding rules one by one with a graphical interface.

I recently scanned out codebase with https://github.com/sindresorhus/eslint-plugin-unicorn/blob/main/docs/rules/prefer-set-has.md and found many instances of potential "accidentally quadratic" uses of array.includes instead. gas a nice autofix to convert to set. there are some fun and sometimes useful lint rules out there...

There’s an ESLint rule for that (albeit in a plugin)

Many popular eslint configs have even introduce rules to warn on its usage for these very reasons.

eslint-plugin-unicorn

I find eslint-plugin-unicorn package pretty useful for updating old code. With IE11 dead and NodeJS v12 LTS sunsetting soon, it's a brave new world.

https://github.com/tc39/proposal-observable

And there's the new one which seems to be getting implemented in node right now:

How does it differ from <https://github.com/tc39/proposal-observable/>?

I think it is a shame that the Observable proposal [1] still seems somewhat stuck in Stage 1. It's a better idea than just raw event emitters because of composability (if no other reason). Making Observables "first class" could go a long way to unifying a lot of reactivity patterns in various frameworks, in theory at least.

To be fair, Observables and especially Observable composition has a rough learning curve and many frameworks like Svelte intentionally prefer implict reactivity and avoiding things like explicit Observables because they are seen as too complex/"too hard" for the average developer.

(Then you get awful worst of both worlds frameworks like Angular that sort of rely on Observables but yet also don't trust teaching Observables and wind up with code that isn't properly Observable and so also has all the code for implicit reactivity and is full of nasty escape hatches that cause all sorts of composition problems and unnecessary side effects.)

[1] https://github.com/tc39/proposal-observable

Uses an interface described in the TC39 observables proposal

JavaScript doesn't have any built-in observables (addEventListener is part of the DOM API specific to browsers) though there is an old observable proposal collecting dust. I think ReactiveX (RxJS) is pretty much the go-to for any kind of observable functionality you may want. That may be a good place to start to really see what observables can do.

Observablelar streamlarga asoslangan reaktiv dasturlash paradigmasini olib kiradi JSga. Shaxsan menga eng yoqqan takliflardan biri. Bu haqida ham alohida maqola yozish niyat bor. RxJS (Angular) bilan ishlab ko'rganlar bo'lsa buni nimaligini juda yaxshi tushunishadi, endi bu library emas balki native 🚀 !!!

Observable is an object that takes a stream of data and emits events over time to react accordingly. There is a talk to add it to the ECMAScript standard and its proposal is here. Till now it is not part of the ECMAScript standard so to use it, you have to use a third-party library and the well-known Reactive Extension in Javascript is RxJs.

Well, the answer is surprisingly no. But, there is an active tc39 proposal going on around for a while, didn’t find it much active though, you could watch out here — https://github.com/tc39/proposal-observable

RxJS is an implementation of observables which do not exist natively in JavaScript. There is a proposal for adding observables to the language, but it's only stage 1 and hasn't been active for years.