My main concern is not one of brevity. The return keyword does two things: it establishes the return value of the function, and it also acts as flow-control, exiting the current function.
(); is a way to set the return value of a function to nothing without using a keyword that screams out "flow-control" to readers skimming the code.
Update: As an aside, in Kavorka there is a lot of Perl code re-writing that goes on. For example, writing something like this:
method foo ($x) { return $x + 1; }
Will actually be rewritten internally to something like:
sub foo { my $self = shift; my $x = @_>=1 ? shift(@_) : croak("Requires \$x"); return $x + 1; }
So far, so good. But what about this method:
method bar ($x) { }
We'd expect it to return nothing. But it's rewritten to something like:
sub bar { my $self = shift; my $x = @_>=1 ? shift(@_) : croak("Requires \$x"); }
Which would actually return $x! The solution? Kavorka inserts (); into the sub body after unpacking parameters from @_. It couldn't use return because that's flow-control, and would prevent the main body of the function from executing.
In reply to Re^4: Hope a subroutine will return undef by default
by tobyink
in thread Hope a subroutine will return undef by default
by qj1020
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |