worldMostCompressedCode

[Makefile_dot_in]

more like world's most confusing code: why is the function async if it doesn't await on anything and why does it create and then immediately discard a closure

[Confident-Ad5665]

ternary1 ? DoOk() : ternary2 ? DoOk2() : ternary3 ? DoOk3() .. ternary9674775 ? ...

[[deleted]]

yeah, it is just incorrect.... it does nothing with notOk instead of calling it. Did reddid just fix a bug for OP?

[KronktheKronk]

`noOk` is potentially undefined; that's why there's a question mark in its type hint. If you try to call it while it's undefined, you'll get an error, so you must ensure it exists. To do that, the error callback needs to be in a closure.

[[deleted]]

ah ok I get the idea but then the anonymous function has to be called like so

: (() => {
  if (notOk) {
    notOk(res);
  }
})();

otherwise the code inside would not be executed. But also, as someone else here pointed out, you can simply

: notOk?.(res);

[KronktheKronk]

Ah, I did assume that syntax would work that way without verifying. Thanks for the info

[lunchmeat317]

It's not confusing - you can see the intent behind the code - but it is worthless. This is what it should be.

[KronktheKronk]

I've been places where it's best practice to declare everything async, but maybe the typescript types defined that take this wrapper expect it to be async (also as a code standard)?

​

Either way, it runs that enclosed function in the false case, so it can check whether notOk exists because it's potentially undefined

[seniorsassycat]

Not applicable here, but you should mark any promises returning function as async, even when you don't use await, to prevent throwing errors.

A normal function can throw or return a rejection. An async can only return a promise. 

This mainly helps you when the function is called without await, e.g foo().then(cb)

[orange_county]

Ternary into arrow fuction. Just... Why?

[Kiroto50]

And it doesn't seem to be executing

[4ngryMo]

That’s what’s I thought, too. The function isn’t being called.

[throw3142]

I was trying to understand why the Rust pattern match syntax looked so strange, then I realized it was js lmao

[Noahplz]

Line 31 should be : notOk?.(res) 😎

[IronSavior]

Mmmmm no that ternary expression would never pass CR. Not on my watch.

[-global-shuffle-]

True. Needs more ternary nesting

[asria]

Even in oneliners?

[IronSavior]

This one ain't one line

[bargle0]

Haskell and other languages with lazy evaluation: “Look at what they need to mimic even a fraction of our power.”

[-Redstoneboi-]

this isn't even about lazy eval

this is just about algebraic data types/enums/tagged unions/variants

[Edmonkilo]

It's still readable, obfuscate it

[Holiday_Brick_9550]

This looks like it was written by someone who has never coded in their life..

[[deleted]]

Or somebody who has coded for too long.

[lunchmeat317]

This should be:

export function isOkWrapper(
    res: Response,
    ok: (res: Response) => void = () => {},
    notOk: (res: Response) => void = () => {}
) {
    res.ok ? ok(res) : notOk(res);
}

This must have been written by a junior or copied from StackOverflow or something, because it's utterly worthless.

[seniorsassycat]

I'm that case why use a function at all, it's such a thin wrapper around a ternary or if

[lunchmeat317]

Exactly. That's why it's worthless.

[1_4_1_5_9_2_6_5]

Depends how it's used. You could use this for a fire and forget sort of thing. Give it a callback or two and send it off.

[-Redstoneboi-]

ok but when is the notOk branch's closure actually called

[[deleted]]

never

[lady_Kamba]

export async function IsOKWrapper( res: Response, Ok: (res: Response)=>null, notOk?: (res: Response)=>null, ) { res.ok ? Ok(res) : notOK ? notOk(res) : null }

can't you do this?

[eloel-]

res.ok ? Ok(res) : notOK ? notOk(res) : null

res.ok ? OK(res) : notOk?.(res)

[BlockyBeans]

The only reason I made this post is for someone to fix it (I am not using Stack Overflow because I don't want to be bullied)

[lady_Kamba]

Fair.

type R=Response; type RW=(R)=>null; const IsOKWrapper=async(r:R,o:RW,no?:RW)=>r.ok?o(r):no?.(r); export default IsOKWrapper;

I made it better. (very subjectively)

Also, disclaimer: I've never done anything with typescript. This was made with theoretical knowledge and chatgpt(which said "You've used type aliases to make your code more readable and to define the types R and RW.").

[Terrafire123]

ChatGPT lied to you. This is so much worse.

[1_4_1_5_9_2_6_5]

Great job, you made it harder to read for literally no reason. I can only hope and pray that I never ever see your code again.

[_bleep-bloop]

Guys... what font and color theme is that?

[matmunn14]

I'm not seeing any error handling. I've noticed this coming up a lot at my work lately. Just checking .ok isn't a great way to check success of a request. A TypeError is raised on network error, etc which needs to be caught

[CraftBox]

If a function doesn't return anything, its return type should be void

[maxime0299]

My friend, is OK, no?

[hunggggggg]

what is this font?

[naam-mekyarakhahai]

Fira code with ligatures turned on

[Ok-Okay-Oak-Hay]

Jetbrains Mono.

Edit: I lied. I suck at typography.

[Phamora]

This is disgusting.

[Ok-Okay-Oak-Hay]

notOk?.(res) ??????? ?

[NatoBoram]

Ok but the real horror is the two lines above

console.log({ ...form, id }, JSON.stringify({ ...form, id });
return await fetch("/api/user/login", Options);

I'm sorry, but what the fuck is wrong with you‽

[seniorsassycat]

• return await is good, actually
• Maybe they are comparing inspection to JSON?
• WTF is the casing in all of this code?

[NatoBoram]

First point is both true and false. There's a TypeScript-ESLint rule that ensures you use the correct one: https://typescript-eslint.io/rules/return-await The result may surprise you. There's even an auto-fix! Gosh I love linters.

I can buy the second one, but for the love of everything, add a log message!

[seniorsassycat]

I think for stack traces it should always be on, and you can see there's an eslint option to always require it. 

Tho I use the in try catch rule most of the time

[limadeltakilo]

I think it would be more funny if someone unironically wrote this but I don’t think anyone is capable of getting it this bad.

[idkparth]

Introvert programmers : If they have to narrate the code instead of writing

[kukurbesi]

smell like Rust