At 3:54, if IntelliJ shows the type we get at the end of lines 11 ... 19, that will be great. I know it can do that but I'm not sure when it does that and when it decides not to do that.
I think the feature you're referring to is called "inlay hints" and probably can be configured to be always visible ... I only know that double-pressing command shows them. Here each intermediate value would be a `Flow[Int]`, as we are always working with numbers.
At 16:50, I think that mapPar is nice otherwise we need a semaphore which each thread, that runs the println(quickRequest.get ...), will need to acquire and release. If I do that demoControlFlow in Java and suppose that namesFlow has 1k elements, I guess that Java will create 1k virtual threads and only 4 can run at any time. It seems like a waste of memory to hold 1k virtual threads in the memory and gradually run them instead of gradually creating them and running them. If that waste doesn't exist (i.e. my thought is wrong), great. Otherwise, does jox also have that waste? If not, how to write some code to show that 1k virtual threads are not created at once but are created gradually as needed?
At 3:54, if IntelliJ shows the type we get at the end of lines 11 ... 19, that will be great. I know it can do that but I'm not sure when it does that and when it decides not to do that.
I think the feature you're referring to is called "inlay hints" and probably can be configured to be always visible ... I only know that double-pressing command shows them. Here each intermediate value would be a `Flow[Int]`, as we are always working with numbers.
Nice. It'd be great if scala was more widely adopted by the industry outside of big/fast data applications.
At 16:50, I think that mapPar is nice otherwise we need a semaphore which each thread, that runs the println(quickRequest.get ...), will need to acquire and release. If I do that demoControlFlow in Java and suppose that namesFlow has 1k elements, I guess that Java will create 1k virtual threads and only 4 can run at any time. It seems like a waste of memory to hold 1k virtual threads in the memory and gradually run them instead of gradually creating them and running them. If that waste doesn't exist (i.e. my thought is wrong), great. Otherwise, does jox also have that waste? If not, how to write some code to show that 1k virtual threads are not created at once but are created gradually as needed?