Re: Control Flow Coding Style

I think both are right, so here are some more specific descriptions I 
used.
1) error checks, and trivial case handling, I return them immediately.
it could also help me control the nest level when having a lot of 
condition checks.

2) when non-trivial codes begin, I normally define a return temp 
variable and keep single exit point. This helps in debugging a lot.

-Jonny


--- In [email protected], "Michael Hunger" <pragmatic@...> 
wrote:
>
> I recently looked at a code review method which is based on rigid 
rule
> checking.
> 
> Two rules bothered me so I started a heated discussion with a 
colleague.
> I'd be interested in your opinions.
> 
> 1) there _must_ be a single point of exit for each method
> 2) each if must have an accompanying else branch
> 
> My colleagues view:
> Both are right.
> It simplifies the maintainability and the ability to add new 
aspects to a
> program to have a single point of input and output.
> Return is a kind of goto and should be avoided (create spaghetti 
code)
> 
> My view:
> Both are overengineering (if enforced).
> * fail fast
> * simplify control flow
> * one thing at a time, no context to carry around
> * guard-clauses and precoditions (default returns)
> * result variable has much to broad scope
> * avoid control flow on content of result variable
> 
> What do you think ?
> 
> Michael
>