Since my previous example didn’t really have return value, I am changing it slightly. So if I’m reading your suggestion of “rewriting that in 3 lines and a single nested scope followed by a single return”, I think you mean it like this?
int retval = 0;
// precondition checks:
if (!p1) retval = -ERROR1;
if (p2) retval = -ERROR2;
if (!p3 && p4) retval = -ERROR3;
// business logic:
if (p1 && !p2 && (p3 || !p4))
{
retval = 42;
}
// or perhaps would you prefer the business logic check be like this?
if (retval != -ERROR1 && retval != -ERROR2 && retval != -ERROR3)
{
retval = 42;
}
// or perhaps you'd split the business logic predicate like this? (Assuming the predicates only have a value of 0 or 1)
int ok = p1;
ok &= !p2;
ok &= p3 || !p4;
if (ok)
{
retval = 42;
}
return retval;
as opposed to this?
// precondition checks:
if(!p1) return -ERROR1;
if(p2) return -ERROR2;
if(!p3 && p4) return -ERROR3;
// business logic:
return 42;
Using a retval has the exact problem that you want to avoid: at the point where we do return retval
, we have no idea how retval
was manipulated, or if it was set multiple times by different branches.
It’s mutable state inside the function, so any line from when the variable is defined to when return retval
is hit must now be examined to know why retval
has the value that it has.
Not to mention that the business logic then needs to be guarded with some predicate, because we can’t early return. And if you need to add another precondition check, you need to add another (but inverted) predicate to the business logic check.
You also mentioned resource leaks, and I find that a more compelling argument for having only a single return. Readability and understandability (both of which directly correlate to maintainability) are undeniably better with early returns. But if you hit an early return after you have allocated resources, you have a resource leak.
Still, there are better solutions to the resource leak problem than to clobber your functions into an unreadable mess. Here’s a couple options I can think of.
- Don’t: allow early returns only before allocating resources via a code standard. Allows many of the benfits of early returns, but could be confusing due to using both early returns and a retval in the business logic
- If your language supports it, use RAII
- If your language supports it, use
defer
- You can always write a cleanup function
Example of option 1
// precondition checks
if(!p1) return -ERROR1;
if(p2) return -ERROR2;
if(!p3 && p4) return -ERROR3;
void* pResource = allocResource();
int retval = 0;
// ...
// some business logic, no return allowed
// ...
freeResource(pResource);
return retval; // no leaks
Example of option 2
// same precondition checks with early returns, won't repeat them for brevity
auto Resource = allocResource();
// ...
// some business logic, return allowed, the destructor of Resource will be called when it goes out of scope, freeing the resources. No leaks
// ...
return 42;
Example of option 3
// precondition checks
void* pResource = allocResource();
defer freeResource(pResource);
// ...
// some business logic, return allowed, deferred statements will be executed before return. No leaks
// ...
return 42;
Example of option 4
int freeAndReturn(void* pResource, const int retval)
{
freeResource(pResource);
return retval;
}
int doWork()
{
// precondition checks
void* pResource = allocResource();
// ...
// some business logic, return allowed only in the same form as the following line
// ...
return freeAndReturn(pResource, 42);
}
Correct. And the same is true even if you are using linux, macOS, android, or a butterfly to manipulate bits to send a message through the internet.
Because if your message ends up on the screen of a windows user, it’s also going to be eaten by AI.
And forget the notion of “anything you post on the internet is forever”, this is also true for private and encrypted comms now. At least as long as they can be decrypted by your recipient, if they use windows.
You want privacy and use linux? Well, that’s no longer enough. You now also need to make sure that none of your communications include a (current or future) windows user as they get spyware by default in their system.
Well maybe not quite by default, yet