Mark Shannon

@dpgeorge I don't really see `button.was_pressed()` as an event, just as a stateful button. @ntoll I'm a bit concerned that `async` and `await` have too many rough edges. Maybe in...

I'd like to implement some sort of event source. I've just reread this thread and it seems that my suggestion is the best (but I may be biassed :wink:). Any...

@whaleygeek The DAL message bus is [closely coupled](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_ball_of_mud), with the rest of the DAL so we can't use it. I see no problem in reusing the same IDs as the...

@deshipu No you can't have multiple iterators running at the same time. Nor we do have a good story for finalising the iterator to reclaim the buffer. I'd like to...

I would suggest that each "effect" function should take a single image and return an iterators of images. They could be methods on images, but iterators are not the simplest...

On 11/11/15 09:46, Radomir Dopieralski wrote: > I think that effects should rather be objects using the iterator > protocol and generating the frames on the fly, than functions returning...

I don't see how effects could be composable in the way you describe. What would `fx.wipe_left(fx.wipe_right(some_image))` do, and how would it work?

Here is a simple implementation of `wipe_left` implementing the `Image -> List(Image)` interface. ``` python WIPE_LEFT = Image("99999876543210000:"*5) def wipe_left(img): for i in range(12, -1, -1): yield WIPE_LEFT.crop(i, 0, 5,...

Presumable you would just convert a single image to a sequence of the same image being repeated? Would all effects need to be infinite sequences?

`being repeated` -> `repeated for ever`