| Thread Previous • Date Previous • Date Next • Thread Next |
On 03/06/2011 10:22 PM, Anders Logg wrote:
On Sun, Mar 06, 2011 at 09:08:10PM +0000, Garth N. Wells wrote:On 06/03/11 21:02, Marie E. Rognes wrote:On 03/06/2011 09:30 PM, noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:if (parameters["max_dimension"].change_count()> 0 && V.dim()> max_dimension) + { return true; - - // Otherwise, not done. - return false; + } + else + return false; }I notice that my early returns keep getting moved into else clauses... I find this approach less readable, especially when there are nested ifs. Why is it the preferred way?Because your comment basically says else, so I'd say it's better to have the code say it consistently. I find it easier to follow, because it's clear that the function exits from the conditional block. The return value is either true or false depending on the one true/false evaluation.
The code is an if -- else if -- else. I don't see how moving that into an if, if -- else increases consistency.
I'm not sure we're talking about the same thing here, but I think the
following examples are *good* practice:
1. Early return to get rid of special cases
void foo()
{
// Get rid of some case
if (...)
return;
// Get rid of another case
if (...)
return;
// Do main bulk of work here
...
}
Alternative using if/else will force main code in one indentation
level.
2. Fallback return at end of block
bool foo()
{
// Handle case 1
if (...)
{
...
return true;
}
// Handle case 2
if (...)
{
...
return true;
}
// No foos found
return false;
}
Yep, I prefer 2. to an if -- else if (-- else if) -- else. -- Marie
| Thread Previous • Date Previous • Date Next • Thread Next |
