Re: (crazyinsomniac) Re: Coding superstitions

I know what you mean about returning things. I think it's a deep brainwash from all other languages that says unused expressions are useless. Then there's the case where you can't tell at a glance which line acually does the returning. I like returns.

On a related (im|ex)plicit note, I argued once when I was at uni about this code:

sub fred {
    if ($_[0] == 'ooyah') {
        return 1;
    } else {
        return 0;
    }
}
[download]

The lecturer insisted that I should take out the else and leave the last return dangling there. I still don't know which I prefer.

Comment on Re: (crazyinsomniac) Re: Coding superstitions Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: (crazyinsomniac) Re: Coding superstitions by blakem (Monsignor) on Jan 09, 2002 at 00:24 UTC
Assuming you don't mind returning 1/undef instead of 1/0 I'd prefer this: `sub fred { $_[0] eq 'ooyah' }` [download] Or, if you want to keep your '0', how about: `sub fred { $_[0] eq 'ooyah' or 0 }` [download] -Blake	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re: Re: Re: (crazyinsomniac) Re: Coding superstitions by n3dst4 (Scribe) on Jan 09, 2002 at 04:27 UTC
Well caught; the class was actually in Java, but I transliterated the example.	[reply]
Re: Re: (crazyinsomniac) Re: Coding superstitions by talexb (Chancellor) on Jan 09, 2002 at 19:37 UTC
I would replace that entire routine with the `?` thingie, as in `sub fred { return ( ( $_[0] eq 'ooyah' ) ? 1 : 0 ); }` [download] Gee, I didn't realize until I was replying that you used `==` and I corrected that to `eq`. Not bad for some guy who wrote C code forever. And I disagree with the lecturer about leaving the last return to dangle -- what he/she suggested is obsfucation, and you're not doing yourself any favours with that approach. --t. alex "Excellent. Release the hounds." -- Monty Burns.	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re: Re: (crazyinsomniac) Re: Coding superstitions by seattlejohn (Deacon) on Jan 15, 2002 at 12:24 UTC
FWIW, I prefer your version, simply because my brain effortlessly translates the `else` into `$_[0] != 'ooyah'`, so it is immediately clear to me that the block gets executed if and only if `$_[0] != 'ooyah'`. I think I can understand the prof's desire for the "dangling return", but I also think it would require a few more clock cycles for my brain to look at that and be convinced exactly under which conditions 0 would be returned. (At the very least, I'd have to see the `return 1` above to know that the `return 0` would never get executed if the if was true -- because the if might just have done some work without actually returning...)	[reply] [d/l] [select]


Pathologically Eclectic Rubbish Lister
	PerlMonks