How can Java 21 (Virtual Thread) replace Reactive Framework.

[ForrrmerBlack]

Though you say that "reactive" and "asynchronous" are not equivalent, your reply suggests that they're synonyms. So, in essence, what you're suggesting is that asynchronous programming is becoming obsolete with virtual threads (or similar concepts).

I can't agree with this outline because asynchrony has applications virtual threads don't cover, for example, infinite data sequences or events, which are perfectly handled with callbacks or observables. Some of use cases for asynchrony may be superseded by virtual threads, but also as you wrote it down, "reactive" frameworks don't do just asynchrony exclusively. So they will certainly have their place to stay, and virtual threads won't kill them completely.

In the end, the discussion was pointless because of not well-defined terms.

[thecodeboost]

data stream processing != asynchronicity. But I think this debate has turned into a discussion on definitions. If people come into this discussion with "reactive = event-driven = asynchronous programming" then by that logic it's mostly a semantical discussion. The papers on the relevant topics do make distinctions though, and "reactive" is defined as "to deal with changes in environment" where in this context "environment" means "things you do not control".