@gaearon
dan
- Merged PRs
- 895
- Reviews
- 6,847
- Repos
- 20
- Followers
- 90,648
- Merged
- 90%
bluesky-social/atproto-website#626you can already read bluesky profile from records. maybe worth mentioning that and then saying “but if you want to hit the Bluesky API with user’s authentication for (something theAPR 2026bluesky-social/atproto-website#626hmm i’m not sure i follow the “unlike other lexicons” here.. they’re always the same syntax in the scope string right? `type:lexicon?options`. i think here too a single concrete exAPR 2026bluesky-social/atproto-website#626> to specific record types maybe “to writing specific record types”? it’s easy to misunderstand permissions as having to do with readsAPR 2026bluesky-social/atproto-website#626how do you feel about a single inline example per each. just to orient the readerAPR 2026bluesky-social/atproto-website#626> Partial wildcards are *not* supported — for example, `app.bsky.*` is not a valid scope string. you probably mean `repo: app.bsky.*` hereAPR 2026reactjs/react.dev#8338do we need this caching stuff now? feels like it's just reimplementing with `'use cache'` gives usMAR 2026reactjs/react.dev#8338is this hack still needed and does it still work? iirc this was to make Back gesture show previous contentMAR 2026reactjs/react.dev#8341that's from App Router which we aren't yet usingMAR 2026reactjs/react.dev#8306?FEB 2026reactjs/react.dev#8279i wouldn’t say they’re escape hatches in this context (refs are). it’s more that conceptually their code belongs *to a particular effect* and you want to always be able to see bothJAN 2026reactjs/react.dev#8279i can call any functions inside Effects so this is neither correct nor useful. in particular, this makes it seem like you’re supposed to extract any callable functions into Effect JAN 2026reactjs/react.dev#8264*not emphasize hahaJAN 2026reactjs/react.dev#8264i mean the async gap — i don't think react has any way to tie setStates after await back to the cause. asynccontext will solve this but it isn't there yetJAN 2026reactjs/react.dev#8264if you want to show only actions i think that's fine but then you have to show the `action` prop implementation too so that i can see the whole pattern ... in action hahaahJAN 2026reactjs/react.dev#8264generally from a code example i want to see enough code that i can copy paste it and it works. the "action" concept is indeed a bit vague because it isn't anchored to any api, and JAN 2026reactjs/react.dev#8264right yea with different it's fineJAN 2026reactjs/react.dev#8264does this setName need to be wrapped in startTransition due to lack of async context?JAN 2026reactjs/react.dev#8264i see, you already have a section like this below. so imo it's fine to now emphasize this here. you can do another step-by-step laterJAN 2026reactjs/react.dev#8264similarly, this feels like a separate section to me.JAN 2026reactjs/react.dev#8264if "or" is needed, that's a separation subsection in Usage imo. we're trying to describe each canonical scenarioJAN 2026