Content deleted Content added
Stevebroshar (talk | contribs) →Augh!: Reply |
No edit summary |
||
Line 226:
:I agree, it is part of the expected and well-typed way of defining callbacks in C#. [[User:Rp|Rp]] ([[User talk:Rp|talk]]) 13:39, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
:You are not ''directly'' asking a question or proposing something. I suggest a more direct approach; otherwise your comment will not result in action. IMO, the best way to get action on WP (any wiki) is to roll up your sleaves and edit. [[User:Stevebroshar|Stevebroshar]] ([[User talk:Stevebroshar|talk]]) 13:43, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
== Sorry, I couldn't resist and edited page ==
You don't understand what it is because the term itself is misleading. (Evgeniy)--[[Special:Contributions/85.140.3.98|85.140.3.98]] ([[User talk:85.140.3.98|talk]]) 12:01, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
"Callback" - is noob term in [[computer programming]] into [[Abstraction (computer science)|abstraction layer]], implying supposedly a [[Function (computer programming)|function]] that sended as a parameter to another function and may be called by it. Although in fact it is not the function itself that is transferred, but only its address of ___location in memory (pointer), as a rule, this is 32-bit or 64-bit address. Calling a function means going to this address, as a rule, using the assembler command call and returning after performing all operations using the assembler command ret. Thus, this term misleads programmers, since the actual transfer of the code itself does not occur, but the transfer of the address occurs, and the call itself is not reverse, but direct.
| |||