Yusuke Kajimoto (9) [Avatar] Offline
As written in the official introduction page, ReactiveX is not FRP. (It does not have continuous time or denotational semantics.)
If you are using the the term “FRP” to merely mean reactive programming combined with functional programming techniques, it is a misnomer.
Albert Vila Calvo (1) [Avatar] Offline
Totally agree. Take a look at this thread from the book "Functional Reactive Programming":


The ReactiveX website says this very clearly on the intro:

It is sometimes called “functional reactive programming” but this is a misnomer. ReactiveX may be functional, and it may be reactive, but “functional reactive programming” is a different animal. One main point of difference is that functional reactive programming operates on values that change continuously over time, while ReactiveX operates on discrete values that are emitted over time. (See Conal Elliott’s work for more-precise information on functional reactive programming.)

You shouldn't use the term FRP.
Andre Artus (7) [Avatar] Offline
@Yusuke Kajimoto,

Agreed, from what I've seen so far this book conflates the two.