> Hi Jared,

Hi Rich!

> If you do put a return; at the end of all of your functions, I'm
> curious as to why? If a function doesn't actually return a value
> (which is highly possible) then it isn't /required/, but that doesn't
> stop me from doing it. I *do* put 'return;' at the end of all
> functions (my question to the list was - does anyone else?)

I went through a phase where I *did* make a point to put returns on all
functions and cl*** methods. This helped for a little while, as it caused me
to slow down a little and think about my code (why is why I think it could
be a healthy practice, especially for someone who is less experienced).

Now, I don't worry at all about it all (meaningless returns, that is). The
way I do things supercedes in a lot of cases worrying about returning
values, and since I have many more experiences, I don't worry about it. When
putting together some code, having meaningless "return;"s inserted at the
end of every code block seems more wasteful than helpful in most cases, so I
don't by practice append returns when unnecessary, although at times I have
done it.

It really doesn't matter in PHP (AFAIK), it all has to do with coding
patterns and practice, and what and how that is impacted by appending
returns. Is it helpful to always stop and think about a return value? Sure!
If you've been coding for five years and you are now equipped with advanced
methods and factoring iterations that render it moot? Personal preference
and dogma I ***ume will rule the day here.

> That is all my original thread was ever really asking - I was just
> curious what other people thought about returning from functions that
> don't actually require a return value. So far the responses have been
> pretty varied, from the (somewhat blinkered) 'how can a function never
> return something?', to 'yes I always return' to 'no I just let it run
> out'.

Maybe someone can shed light on what happens when the parser encounters a
"return;". Would there be anything useful to that (I don't think so, but I
don't know).

> Based on the variety of replies it appears there is no 'standard' for
> this. Just as with code structure and studly-caps it's obviously a bit
> of a religious debate.

If bumpy/camel case zealots are the bedouins of programming, what are people
who insist on returns? Returnaholics?

> I think perhaps it is a psychological thing actually, as if I don't
> consider the function 'finished' until it hits a return;. Almost like
> you're issuing an instruction to tell PHP "yes, as the programmer I am
> now happy for you to return to where-ever you were called from" -
> perhaps just a way of exerting our control

It can also be used to visually parse a page of code ("returns at this tab
spacing means end of code block..."). So it can make the code modestly
easier to read, maybe.

And no, I don't think programmers are ever control freaks. Ever. No, I said
EVER. You're wrong.

> > Should those checks be contained in the codeblock or cl*** BEFORE
returning?
> > I think so.
>
> I would agree (because it's how I do it , but this isn't an approach
> everyone takes.

There are times when "return;" is meaningful, such as breaking out of loops
(and the function), switch statements, and whatnot. For all other times when
a return isn't expressly meaningful, I see it as a matter personal
preference, which is usually influenced by someone else's overarching
dogmatic philosophy being impressed on them.

Good thing there aren't folks like that in programming! Right?!?

--
Jared Farrish
Intermediate Web Developer
Denton, Tx

Abraham Maslow: "If the only tool you have is a hammer, you tend to see
every problem as a nail." $$