Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
good chemistry is complicated,
and a little bit messy -LW
 
PerlMonks  

Re^2: Hope a subroutine will return undef by default

by tobyink (Abbot)
on Feb 11, 2014 at 22:59 UTC ( #1074532=note: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re: Hope a subroutine will return undef by default
in thread Hope a subroutine will return undef by default

I'm starting to prefer simply adding this to the end of the sub:

();
use Moops; class Cow :rw { has name => (default => 'Ermintrude') }; say Cow->new->name


Comment on Re^2: Hope a subroutine will return undef by default
Download Code
Re^3: Hope a subroutine will return undef by default
by LanX (Canon) on Feb 11, 2014 at 23:04 UTC
    well if you really wanna "golf" better skip the semicolon and safe 33% of the necessary characters. ;-)

    Cheers Rolf

    ( addicted to the Perl Programming Language)

      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.

      use Moops; class Cow :rw { has name => (default => 'Ermintrude') }; say Cow->new->name
        IMHO its still flow control (its an exit point), so no need to hide it.

        (); is fine for short lambdas, otherwise IMHO explicit is better than implicit.

        YMMV! :)

        Cheers Rolf

        ( addicted to the Perl Programming Language)

      It is a good habit to omit semicolons after the commands that should not be followed by anything else (return, next, etc.). If you accidentaly add something, you get an error.
      لսႽ ᥲᥒ⚪⟊Ⴙᘓᖇ Ꮅᘓᖇ⎱ Ⴙᥲ𝇋ƙᘓᖇ

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://1074532]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others chanting in the Monastery: (10)
As of 2014-10-31 18:50 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    For retirement, I am banking on:










    Results (223 votes), past polls