Change names of subscription interfaces. about effection HOT 6 CLOSED

Using SubscriptionIterator is much better. In my mini-effection spike I opted for the following naming, which is another decent option, IMO.

• Subscription -> OperationIterator
• Subsribable -> OperationIterable
• ChainableSubscription -> Subscription
• ChainableSubscribable -> Subscribable (I didn't actually implement this)

from effection.

Subscription -> OperationIterator

If we make the type of Operation recursive, then an "OperationIterator" is really just another type of operation?

type Operation<T> = Promise<T> | Iterator<Operation<unknown>, T>

from effection.

@cowboyd I don't think so, the same way that AsyncIterator<T> != Iterator<Promise<T>>, an OperationIterator is not quite an iterator over operations.

from effection.

I agree, but that's why I think exploring a different nomenclature is warranted. The sentence "an AsyncIterator is not an iterator over promises" is not confusing, whereas the sentence "An OperationIterator is not an iterator over operations" is.

from effection.

Ahh, I see, that's true.

EffectionIterator and EffectionIterable would be other options which might make sense?

from effection.

What's our equivalent of Async here? Effect? EffectIterator?

from effection.