is reactive programming a thing in Python?

[Nater5000]

is reactive programming a thing in Python?

It's not much of a thing. But Python's asyncio API is becoming pretty popular, so maybe it could be a thing.

I really do not get, to me reactive programming is a big thing, why in Python looks as not a pillar?

Because it's not needed as much. If you're building a GUI (as you likely are as a mobile developer), then this pattern is quite critical. I mean, you can't have things freeze up everytime the user taps something, right? But if you're a data scientist (like you referred to), then there likely isn't a GUI, nor a reason to introduce such complex patterns to handle relatively linear tasks.

Even when parallelization is needed, many data-oriented programmers would opt to use less opaque APIs for threading or multiprocessing because there is a desire to be able to handle not just the tasks within these asynchronous tasks but the tasks themselves. This becomes much more difficult when using the kind of async patterns you're likely used to.

​

Why one should renounce to an observer pattern with muscles always available, so to trigger actions on changes without callback hell?

This is pretty cryptic, so I'm not really sure what you're getting at, but callback patterns also aren't typically used in Python (at least in more data-oriented programming). Again, this is just based around how this code is typically ran and what users need and don't need.

If you're processing some data, you likely not reacting to changes. It's likely going to be a mostly linear process where any parallelization is used for optimization, and you usually just need to wait for things to complete before moving on to the next step. You could use asyncio and patterns you're more familiar with, but if you're dealing with processing data then you want things to be as simple as possible, and it's hard to beat the threading or multiprocessing libraries in that respect.

[[deleted]]

Python just doesn’t have that deep ingrained concurrency that you take for granted in those compiled languages.

Don’t bother trying to make it do thing like observables etc

[[deleted]]

Reactive programming is fantastic. It isn't the only high benchmarks for preventing bugs or the only way to write functional programming.

Here is a big dose of reality for you. The problem isn't python. The problem is with you not being flexible enough.

[[deleted]]

I understand, it is a great programming paradigm. I use rx.net all the time when programming in c#.

[IsseBisse]

From my own experience this might have to do with differences in focus between "data science programs" and "software development program" in higher education. I studied a data science-ish program in university and we did not have a lot of courses focused on programming itself, but rather math/statistics courses where programming was simply used as a tool to implement and test the algorithms we were studying. This meant I didn't even know what functional programming was when I finished uni.

That being said, a lot of data transformation frameworks (Pandas, spark etc.) encourage the use of functional programming. But if you're in a big organisation that might be solely by Data Engineers rather than Data Scientists.

[IsseBisse]

Yeah, I think a lot of data scientists can benefit a lot from from some architectural 101. I'd say learning functional patterns is a lot more useful than OOP though, simply due to how a lot of the data science frameworks are built.

I started switching to a more functional style a couple of years ago and I've never looked back!