From: Arlen Christian Mart Cuss <celtic@...>
Date: 2007-10-21T19:50:07+09:00
Subject: Re: Is it always the norm to skip 'return'?

Hi,

On Sat, 2007-10-20 at 18:56 +0900, Alex Young wrote:
> "AV Rule 113 (MISRA Rule 82, Revised)
> Functions will have a single exit point.
> Rationale: Numerous exit points tend to produce functions that are both 
> difficult to understand and analyze.
> Exception: A single exit is not required if such a structure would 
> obscure or otherwise significantly complicate (such as the introduction 
> of additional variables) a function’s control logic. Note that the usual 
> resource clean-up must be managed at all exit points."

I think we're both in agreement and not. Particularly, the exception -
if it would obscure/complicate the control logic.

Typical C++ programming tendencies, however, should make the matter of
resource releasing a non-issue; objects are typically passed in by
reference (cleanup takes place lower in the stack) or are instantiated
in the function itself (and are automatically destructed on function
exit/exception conditions). Some people tend to use pointers and
new/delete for everything, and that's when you get issues with exit
points like this.

> It's less of a problem in Ruby, I think, mainly because of the 
> expressiveness and the presence of GC.

Still, I think you're right about it being a lesser problem in Ruby, and
in the end it may just come down to style, yet again. Readable code is
achievable both ways, I believe, but it may be more effort in some cases
with several exit points.

Arlen