Hugo Mills wrote: > If you were writing a function with a fast path and a slow path, > which style would you use to write the function? > > > Style A: > > if can_use_fast_path: > return "fast path result" > # do slow stuff > return "slow path result" > > > Style B: > > result = "fast path result" > if !can_use_fast_path: > # do slow stuff > result = "slow path result" > return result > > > Assume that the fast path is a single expression, and the slow path > is at least tens of lines of code. Why would you pick one style over > the other? Would you use a different idiom in different languages? If > so, why? >
I have used both in different contexts but where Perl will return the value of the last expression evaluated in a subroutine ensuring the exit point is at the end of a subroutine could mean more readable/consistent code, so B. For error handling style B offers a single test opportunity. Perhaps for maintenance ease this is a better choice producing a more robust idiom. It may be more difficult to keep track of the value of result when using style B where the danger of this is minimal in A as the exit point occurs as soon as result receives a true value, minimising the chance of an incorrect value accidentally being assigned to result due to a copy and paste or similar error. I think in general a single exit point has benefits over two. Damian -- WWW http://www.diaser.org.uk - working together to make long term digital archives more accessible RSS http://sourceforge.net/export/rss2_projnews.php?group_id=258272 -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. -- Please post to: Hampshire@mailman.lug.org.uk Web Interface: https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/hampshire LUG URL: http://www.hantslug.org.uk --------------------------------------------------------------
