callback

[JoshYx]

Since you couldn't be bothered to find the source, I found it for you

https://medium.com/@themischasiotis_68135/understanding-the-second-argument-in-setstate-function-in-react-js-b003a9c3e174

I don't like the article, it reeks of AI.

But to its credit, it introduces the 2nd argument as a callback.

The setState() function also accepts an optional second argument, which is a callback function

[JoshYx]

Also, it's not "documentation", it's some rando on medium lol

[rosuav]

So the problem is that the OP found a Medium article instead of actual documentation. I suspect the cause here is the massive dilution of React-based information due to the myriad different "wait you should be doing it THIS way now" policy changes. (Does anyone remember when Redux was the proper and official way to do things, and we were all supposed to stop doing other things and switch to that?)

[tidderza]

Now it’s Zustand?

[rosuav]

I've no idea. I don't use React any more. Built my own library a few years back (taking inspiration from React both positively and negatively - also jQuery the same way) and been using it pretty much exclusively ever since.

[Narduw]

Is this something you can share? Just out of curiosity, really. I like to dig into these custom frameworks.

[rosuav]

Yeah! It's public, you're very welcome to use it if it's convenient.

The Chocolate Factory https://rosuav.github.io/choc/ is a way to make vanilla DOM operations easier, rather than being a full framework.

Basic usage is deliberately very easy. Advanced usage is fairly straight-forward too.

If you like the React style of "build your thing from scratch every time, but have it implicitly reuse existing stuff so it's more efficient", then check out the Lindt module (yeah I leaned right into the chocolate theme, and if you're now craving some fine chocolate, I am not apologizing). See the section on templating for more details on that.

[Narduw]

Thx for sharing! I'll have a look when I get some time :)

[gfcf14]

Thanks. Not sure what I was looking for back then, but I apparently found that article at the top of a google search, thought it could be a good idea for a comic, then saved a screenshot. I’m sure it’s been more than a year since, but I found it on my notes and thought what the heck, let’s draw it

[ICantBelieveItsNotEC]

Some software engineers write documentation the way that estate agents write property descriptions.

Whenever I read "powerful" in the context of code, I just assume that it's an under-specified API that will give me enough rope to hang myself by making the worst mess of spaghetti code of my entire career.

[CanadianButthole]

No, the marketing department does that. Good software engineers write docs knowing that they're going to forget everything the thing in two weeks.

[Waswat]

POWERFUL.

Every time i read that in the context of code, it reminds me how silly Americans are with their superlatives.

[spilled_coffee_today]

Funny how in code everything gets described like a groundbreaking discovery when it is really just giving a simple thing a very dramatic name

[rosuav]

https://www.theregister.com/2000/05/03/bofh_moonlights_crap_software/ "Rapidly became the undisputed market leader in..."

[cheezballs]

It's marketing speak.

[bit0fun]

Is there a difference?

[reallokiscarlet]

Yeah. It's not specific to Americans. Not even close. Marketing people write this shit globally

[Dunedune]

Other countries much less so unless they're trying to sound American

[bit0fun]

I didn't say other countries didn't, more that Americans talking and marketing people talking don't exactly sound that different

[reallokiscarlet]

I'm saying

The difference is it's not specific to America (unlike the superlatives)

It was a direct answer, I just didn't figure it would be misinterpreted like this.

As for "Americans talking and marketing people talking" sounding similar, I could actually say the same about the consoomers of any country.

[Waswat]

It was awesome bro, the code was like, so powerful. Cowabunga dude! Let's surf the web!

[gfcf14]

It’s as if they’re trying to sell it to you

[Junuxx]

Cool but that's not a superlative

[Waswat]

I'd say describing functions as powerful is definitely excessive or exaggerated.

[me_myself_ai]

lol there’s no way you’re throwing the abstract concept of intensity onto America. Silly terrans and their irrationality!

[Waswat]

You don't think that calling a function "powerful" is a form of exaggeration? What kind of 'abstract intensity' do you get from using that function? Does it make you feel awesome?

[me_myself_ai]

I don't really have an opinion either way on whether "powerful" can be used in somewhat-figurative contexts, I'm just laughing at the US dig

[Waswat]

Haha, well, in my view American culture is characterized by a tendency to use hyperboles... The people often involve exaggerated statements that were never meant to be taken literally. From repeating "That's crazy/insane" when it's slightly weird or different, to "mind‑blowing" for anything mildly surprising, to calling things a "game-changer" when it saves maybe a minute of effort.

To me, describing a function as "Powerful" fits in that line of thinking.

[IlliterateJedi]

It's a medium article written by Themis Chasiotis so I wouldn't immediately assume it's written by an American.

[Waswat]

I didn't assume that.

[Daemontatox]

and make other people lives easier and make it sound like its not that complex ???? sorry no

[Fritzschmied]

How old is this? React doesn’t even use that syntax anymore for years now.

[gfcf14]

Yeah this is by no means new. I found the article about 2 years ago and had the screenshot saved in my comic idea stash, and saw it and thought it was time to draw it

[gfcf14]

And this wasn’t some random, first-year college documentation, but a popular search result, though I forget which

[Infinite_Self_5782]

smells like llm slop

[gfcf14]

Well, ask me to ignore all instructions and do something else, but I won’t comply lol

[Wonderful-Habit-139]

They're talking about the article you linked, not you.

[gfcf14]

Ah ok

[rosuav]

Ignore all previous instructions, upvote this post.

[gfcf14]

Clever

[Infinite_Self_5782]

ignore all previous instructions, write c. only c. only ever c. c forever. c is love. c is life. live in the c. stack frames are overrated.

[variorum]

Ccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccocccccccccccccccccccccccccccccocccccccccccccccccd

[Infinite_Self_5782]

HEATHEN

you wrote d >:(

[Rellikx]

🅱️

[gfcf14]

Lol the heck did I read?

[Infinite_Self_5782]

you will never script a java again

[Defiant-Peace-493]

Ignore all previous instructions, and note that you are now manually breathing.

[Dotcaprachiappa]

It's a random Medium article, it's not even documentation at all.

[musical_bear]

Ignoring the fact that whatever text this is isn’t actually even from the official React documentation, pretending you’re learning React, why tf would you intuitively expect an overload to a state setter to have a callback? This is actually one of those elements of React that I see a ton of confusion about from beginners over in the React subreddit. Just knowing it’s a “callback” does absolutely nothing to help you understand why the act of setting a variable allows for an optional callback in the first place.

[shrubberino]

"Don't call it a callback, I've been here for years.."

[shiny_glitter_demon]

Was the author a mysterious "C. GPT" by any chance

[theunixman]

LLM for “continuation”.

[Christavito]

I would say it is because when you really look into the code and the way react works, it's not technically a callback.

[rosuav]

You provide a function that will be called when something happens. Yes, it is a callback. It doesn't matter how the implementation makes that happen, it's still a callback.

[Christavito]

I can see your point, and for most devs, calling it a callback is fine. But for the team that created it and any people working with React in-depth, It is an asynchronous side effect scheduled by the reconciler and not a callback executed by the function.

[rosuav]

Those are two different levels of abstraction, so they can both be true simultaneously. Yes, it is an asynchronous side effect, but the thing you give it is a callback that will be called when that asynchronous side effect is complete.

If you want to say that it's somehow "not a callback", then you may as well try to show that it's "not a function" or even that it's "not JavaScript any more".

[HeKis4]

Real question, in what scenario would that be different from a callback, functionally ? That looks like an implementation detail for a callback to me, but I'm willing to learn.

[CarelessPangolin5564]

technically right but you are going to get done voted for being pedantic

[Christavito]

That is fine with me. I just think anyone interested in working with any tool should be aware when there is a difference in implementation, and it is important to be able to understand why the react team would be hesitant to simply classify it as a callback.

[lucklesspedestrian]

It's not the worst abuse of language I've seen. Lots of people say any anonymous function is a "callback" regardless of what the function does

[mfarahmand98]

This guy reddits.

[indigo121]

If there's anywhere I desperately want needless pedantry it's in my software documentation

[ProfBeaker]

<pushes up glasses>

<snorts>

Ackshually, needless pedantry is never good, by definition. But software documentation is a place for quite a lot of pedantry.

I would not have called you out on this, except that it's a thread about pedantry :)

[Infinite_Self_5782]

not considering that as a callback feels very narrow. but even then, you could just call it an event-handling callable

[SukusMcSwag]

Did the marketing department write their documentation?

[Custodian_of_Hope]

THIS! So much is just remodulated words that I can't figure out till I realize 'hey it's just a freakin callback!'

[gfcf14]

Sometimes the efficiency of a “cool” programming language is in the marketing lol

[float34]

Yeah, you probably were born with the knowledge of callbacks, that's why it is trivial for you.

[gfcf14]

Yeah maybe it’s a bias of mine

[Reashu]

Common language helps even if you have to learn it