RE: RE: RE (2): Filehandle Filter

I disagree strongly about avoiding return. That practice was desirable on old versions of Perl for speed. However, its explicit use makes the code easier to read, especially since you can't declare whether your sub is supposed to return a value or if it just happens to return a value because of the last statement executed.

- tye (but my friends call me "Tye")

Comment on RE: RE: RE (2): Filehandle Filter Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
RE (5): Filehandle Filter by tilly (Archbishop) on Aug 11, 2000 at 17:27 UTC
When return forces you to choose between having the sub be 2 lines or running over 80 char, I think chip is right. If you are comfortable with anon subs, you probably have no problem with implicit return values. Most of the time I use return, but in this case I stripped it out. And since the entire point of the code was to show me throwing around a ton of constructs, with each one serving to make the code shorter and clearer to a true expert (though not to co-workers), I had no hesitation in pulling out my return at the end of TIEHANDLE. Which I possibly shouldn't have done. Oh well.	[reply]
RE: RE (5): Filehandle Filter by tye (Sage) on Aug 11, 2000 at 17:32 UTC
Ah, yes. I couldn't see the original `return`s so I just made assumptions (insert cliche here) based on the complete lack of them. Yes, for subs that do almost nothing but return a value, I agree that no explicit `return` is often better. Thanks for the clarification. - tye (but my friends call me "Tye")	[reply] [d/l] [select]


Perl: the Markov chain saw
	PerlMonks