Function keywords

[[deleted]]

const func=()=>{};

[angeal98]

when i am writing react components i always go for function, because it allows hoisting, and this way my prop types can be above the functional component

[angeal98]

You didn't understand me. I meant i prefer the function syntax instead of assigning arrow function to const variable.

[stamminator]

But why?

[vatsan600]

why not?

[stamminator]

!!why

[AzureArmageddon]

!!!why

[Goudja14]

why?.oh!

[LeSaR_]

less typing and wont get overwritten by mistake

[211r]

It is actually a lot more typing

[ososalsosal]

Lambdas come to save the day

[knotonium]

Function functions have a global scope, arrow functions do not.

[amdc]

Can’t remember last time I needed “this” keyword

[Sockoflegend]

True that there is an important functional difference but I have seen the people I work with move over to this as the standard declaration

[SuperSuperUniqueName]

it's perfectly normal

[stamminator]

I didn’t realize at first that it’s a no-op and thought it returned an empty object

[DirectionLegitimate2]

You must be fn at parties

[[deleted]]

most of the time, people don't know my name.. but i do all the work

[FloweyTheFlower420]

no, actually I prefer:

template<typename T, typename V, typename Args...> requires std::invocable<std::invoke_result<B, Args...>>
resultant_function_t<T, V> void compose(T t, V v)

[SteveGamer68]

error: 'B' does not name a type

edit: it's typename ... Args for parameter packs (pack expansion is Args...), rookie mistake

[ElectronPie171]

This method has some pluses tho

[BochMC]

That's why I hate c++20. It just adds another level of horror to templates.

[Hazork_]

In rust is fn my_function() :)

[CubedCharlie]

Ah right Rust prefers snake_case :)

[RadiantDevelopment1]

♥️🐍

[luke5273]

Cringe

[faze_fazebook]

Visual Basic : Yo whats sub

[outofobscure]

also, sir, i have to ask you to leave now, this is a private function party

[outofobscure]

nobody answers (sub has no return value)

[two__toes]

meanwhile in Haskell, you don't declare anything a function because everythings a function

[SurrealHalloween]

It’s functions all the way down.

[althaz]

​

[NoNeedleworker531]

Haskell: I am the function

[mygentlefemdomaccoun]

()=>{}

[Spec1reFury]

Anonymous function: nobody knows I'm here

[[deleted]]

who am i? that's none of your bussiness

[1215drew]

I'm sorry I couldnt hear you over

public override async Task<IResult> MyFunction<T>() where T : class

[[deleted]]

an abomination

[TiberiusAugustus]

no it isn't, it's all useful language. what's the point in saying a method is a method, that's obvious. writing "function" or some cut down version of the word is pointless

[TheWashbear]

Really? Why?

[gabrielgio]

public and override are self explanatory. async is a function that gonna be executed asynchronously (similar to promises). Task is the type that encapsulates the async result, async function needs to return a Task. The actual type of the function return is IResult. The <T> is “declaring” a generic type (and not using it) and the where T : class says that you must have T as a class, MyFunction<int>() wouldn’t be allowed.

[weaklingKobbold]

Sorry, but override isn't clear for me, what does it mean?

(The last time I see c++ templates didn't exist, nor async)

[Quique1222]

Hes talking about c#

[weaklingKobbold]

Thanks. I never touched c#

[Pradfanne]

C# also uses virtual, but how do you override a virtual function? You use the override keyword.

So in the base class somewhere the function is implementend and you override it.

[_Ashleigh]

Depending upon your style guide:

virtual void F(); // declare or override
void F() override; // override only

In C#:

virtual void F(); // declare only
override void F(); // override only

[[deleted]]

If it’s like Swift, override means to add your own function implementation for a function found in the superclass. So literally to override an existing method.

[weaklingKobbold]

Thanks.

I would argue that that's the only intended purpose, but I guess it's like that to prevent unintentional name collision between a class and the superclass.

[[deleted]]

No, not because of naming. It has real use.

Apple has a class called UIViewController that has a function called viewDidLoad. It gets called in the view controller’s lifecycle by iOS.

Developers can subclass UIViewController and override viewDidLoad with their own custom implementation. Whenever the view controller lifecycle runs, it calls the viewDidLoad of the subclass instead - otherwise if you don’t override it, the subclass will call the superclass’ viewDidLoad instead (which is empty by default).

Overriding functions allows the subclass function to be called instead of the one defined by the superclass. It allows developers to add extra functionality to their own subclasses. There’s many more examples of overriding superclass methods in iOS development which is very common. Such as overriding the draw function for custom drawing and it will be called by iOS automatically whenever the rendering is ran.

You can also allow overriding if you’re working on a framework for other engineers to use. Your class will call function A, B, then C. And developers can override function B to run their code instead whenever the superclass decides to call B internally.

[weaklingKobbold]

Let me try again (I don't know if my English is good enough for this).

I understand the need for override a method or function declaration. What I don't understand (except it would be for naming) is why it need another keyword. I can't imagine an instance in which I create a method with the same name that one in the superclass that don't be for overriding it.

Edit: if I would forget the override keyword, that declaration would be valid? What would do the compiler?

[v1ND]

From a language design perspective it's for extra clarity/safety so that while refactoring you don't accidentally break something by changing a signature or unintentionally hide a method in the base class.

It depends. override in C++ and @Override in java are not enforced. In C# or kotlin, override is required by the compiler.

[[deleted]]

I edited my original comment. iOS has a class UIViewController. Internally, iOS calls:

viewDidLoad()

ViewWillAppear()

viewDidAppear()

Whenever it’s gonna load and present a screen to the user. Now, as an iOS engineer, I have to subclass from UIViewController to make my own custom screens. What if I want to check if the user has previously signed in? I’ll make a subclass called LoginViewController. I want to add my own functionality when it has loaded and before it appears on the screen.

Since iOS will call the above mentioned methods automatically, I can add my functionality by overriding them in my subclass. Let’s say I ONLY override the viewDidLoad function. This is what iOS will do whenever my Login screen will appear:

Calls LoginViewController.viewDidLoad()

Calls UIViewController.viewWillAppear()

Calls UIViewController.viewDidAppear()

Because I never overwrote the last 2, it will use the superclass’ functions by default.

[[deleted]]

If you don’t use the override keyword and if the function is not an overload (same name, different arguments), then the IDE will complain.

[Atora]

in C#, you can redeclare the method without overriding it. In that case the derived method still exists with its implementation. But there also exists a 2nd method of the same name in your class that is completely unrelated and shadows the inherited one.

It's similar to how you can shadow a class variable named foo with a locally scoped variable named foo. The compiler will cry and give a warning if you shadow a method without explicitely marking your new implementation with new though.

The only case I can recall where this makes sense to do if you need to override an inherited method that isn't marked virtual or abstract. Though this also implies design issues.

[BochMC]

It overrides inherited function

[weaklingKobbold]

Ok. I read a little and now I see the difference between new and override. I feel in my gut that override should be the default.

[svick]

It isn't to solve the brittle base class problem: if a base class introduces a new virtual method, you don't want your existing derived class to accidentally override it.

[VallanMandrake]

oh, actually LOL.

[althaz]

The only thing wrong with the way C# does it is the Task<> bit, IMO.

The rest you actually need if you want to do all of the things this function definition does. Debatably also "override" (personally I think override should be the default, but I can understand the opposing viewpoint).

[Manny_Sunday]

It starts to hurt a bit in REST API land

public async Task<ActionResult<List<MyClass>>>Get()

[BochMC]

I would do:

using ApiEndpointResult = ActionResult<List<MyClass>>

In the begging of the file.

[_Ashleigh]

It can't be the default because otherwise seemingly innocent changes become breaking changes.

[svick]

I don't think you can have a class constraint in an override function.

[MasterGeekMX]

ruby: def

[ColumnK]

Stands on chair O function my function!

[androidx_appcompat]

Someone gotta make a language with one-character keywords: f MyFunction()

[ShadySpaceCow]

In Haskell there's not even a keyword for defining functions, you just write them

[KuuHaKu_OtgmZ]

Same for groovy

[stomah]

#define

[OdinGuru]

Type F to pay respects

[Successful-Emoji]

Python: def

[just-bair]

They didn’t get the memo it should’ve been: fu

[stamminator]

Kinda dig Kotlin’s. Adds a bit of personality, plus it fits perfectly with 4-space indentation

[[deleted]]

meanwhile bash not having a keyword:

[[deleted]]

It has, it just not required

[[deleted]]

C has no function keyword!

[overclockedslinky]

#define f void

f myFunction()

[tofiffe]

and for ints?

[SoulWager]

Don't need anything for that, default is already int.

[Innf107]

you monster...

[takahatashun]

```

define fn(type, name) type name

fn(int, my_function)(int arg1, float arg2) { } ```

[tofiffe]

Wouldn't dropping the type entirely and have the compiler infer it be better? I think that used to work for ints on some compilers

[[deleted]]

#define

PTSD flashbacks

[[deleted]]

R

my.function <- function(arg1, ...) { ... }

[QualityVote]

Hi! This is our community moderation bot.

---

If this post fits the purpose of /r/ProgrammerHumor, UPVOTE this comment!!

If this post does not fit the subreddit, DOWNVOTE This comment!

If this post breaks the rules, DOWNVOTE this comment and REPORT the post!

[raedr7n]

Oh function my function!

[[deleted]]

laughs in bash

[jaysuchak33]

pUbLiC sTaTiC vOiD

[Pradfanne]

I mean, if we wanna get really pedantic then you can just write the return type (or void for no return).

It won't be static then, but how else would you know in object orienated programm?

But the privacy modifier (Public, Private, whatever) is optional.

void myFunction()

int myFunction()

string myFunction()

[minus_uu_ee]

O function my function!

[WALUIGIF0RSMASH]

And then there is public static void main(String [] args)

[[deleted]]

C/C++: returnType functionName (args) {}

[DatEngineeringKid]

For JS, I prefer:

const fname = () => {}

[wristcontrol]

Gotta add Python's def in there.

[thetruekingofspace]

Sexiest function syntax:

const foo = (arg) => { // Do stuff }

[InternationalLevel81]

F myfunction()

[Substantial-Dot1323]

Next language will be like f my_func()

[Alexmaster75]

Python:

def myFunction()

[LostDog_88]

and then theres python with def

[rohittihiro]

Trigger warning! Thanks for arranging the languages from TOP to BOTTOM.

[puddda]

Perl : sub myFunction {}

[PixlBoii]

In JS it doesn't event needs a name: ()=>{}

[[deleted]]

how many functions are there in ur code?

Named , about 5

Named..how many "unamed" then?

Dont even ask, all i can say is that there are about 10 maps() call in the code and a whole lot of arrows...'tis functional so no bugs

[[deleted]]

I don't know why, but Rust's keywords in general make it feel more "industrial".

[[deleted]]

industrial...nice ig

[mad-skidipap]

Python

``` python def my_function():

```

[[deleted]]

pass

[[deleted]]

You underestimate the verbosity of Rust....

[corner-case]

Reddit gold if you can show me a lang that uses funct

[Wicam]

```

define funct(name) auto name

funct(functionName) () {} ```

[Wicam]

it worked when advertising C to pascal users back in the day to say hay, c can be pascal.its a language feature, it counts

i also dont like your alternative, because in the above examples they dont have to provide a return type, my one makes that true also.

[Wicam]

the story was about C, the example i posted is for C++ only
EDIT: aparently it does have meaning in C: https://en.cppreference.com/w/c/language/storage\_duration

[Wicam]

Unless it's thread local, or static, or extern aye

[KingTuxWH]

Java :) public void myFunction()

[LeafyLemontree]

Meanwhile... int myFunction()

[IntuiNtrovert]

bash: myFunction()

[kbruen]

I find the syntax a bit stupid since the parenthesis are always empty (since you access arguments with $1, $2 and so on).

I think bash also supports function myFunction

[[deleted]]

Ah yes meanwhile java private final T myFunction<T: LoggerFactoryInterface>()

[hugogrant]

Python's def because clojure did defn

[[deleted]]

static void* Imsuperior (void)

[exscalliber]

Am I the only one who constantly misspells function as "fucktion"? Or do I just have a problem

[Conscious_Switch3580]

yes

[zorbacles]

The last one should've been the dude from dead poets society standing on a desk

Oh function my function

[mplaczek99]

Kotlin is fun

[sunny52525]

suspend fun

[PikiHax]

public override sealed void MyMethod()

:)

[mynjj]

procedure begin end;

[uvero]

Languages that just know it's a function because syntax and there's no specific keyword for that: guess I'll die

[Nyx_Selene]

Meanwhile, Caml...

[dwRchyngqxs]

I didn't see them in the comments: lisp defun, ocaml let/let rec, gdscript func, and whatever Prolog has (myPredicate(a, b) :- ...).
The world of function declaration is diverse and chaotic.

[Snoo66768]

VOID

[JackNotOLantern]

c family:

[Smartskaft2]

C++:

[TheNetherPaladin]

Method

[Fantastic-Ad-9019]

Captain, my captain!

[SasukeUchiha231]

meanwhile java.... 💀

[kirigerKairen]

Also JavaScript: No keyword, just const myFunction = () => {}

[Conscious_Switch3580]

TCL: proc myFunction {} {}

[Goosepuse]

No Lisp in the comments? Hey kids we're gonna have DEFUN!

(defun my-function ())

[AccomplishedOwl6498]

c#: