如果你最终得到了很多返回值，那么你的代码可能有问题。否则，我同意有时能够从子例程的多个位置返回是很好的，特别是当它使代码更干净的时候。

Perl 6:坏例子

sub Int_to_String( Int i ){
  given( i ){
    when 0 { return "zero" }
    when 1 { return "one" }
    when 2 { return "two" }
    when 3 { return "three" }
    when 4 { return "four" }
    ...
    default { return undef }
  }
}

这样写会更好吗

Perl 6:好例子

@Int_to_String = qw{
  zero
  one
  two
  three
  four
  ...
}
sub Int_to_String( Int i ){
  return undef if i < 0;
  return undef unless i < @Int_to_String.length;
  return @Int_to_String[i]
}

注意，这只是一个简单的例子

Well, maybe I'm one of the few people here old enough to remember one of the big reasons why "only one return statement" was pushed so hard. It's so the compiler can emit more efficient code. For each function call, the compiler typically pushes some registers on the stack to preserve their values. This way, the function can use those registers for temporary storage. When the function returns, those saved registers have to be popped off the stack and back into the registers. That's one POP (or MOV -(SP),Rn) instruction per register. If you have a bunch of return statements, then either each one has to pop all the registers (which makes the compiled code bigger) or the compiler has to keep track of which registers might have been modified and only pop those (decreasing code size, but increasing compilation time).

今天仍然坚持使用一个return语句的一个原因是易于自动重构。如果您的IDE支持方法提取重构(选择一系列行并将它们转换为一个方法)，那么如果您想提取的行中有一个return语句，特别是如果您正在返回一个值，则很难做到这一点。

不，因为我们不再生活在20世纪70年代了。如果你的函数足够长以至于多次返回都是个问题，那么它就太长了。

(除了语言中有异常的任何多行函数都会有多个退出点这一事实。)

I've seen it in coding standards for C++ that were a hang-over from C, as if you don't have RAII or other automatic memory management then you have to clean up for each return, which either means cut-and-paste of the clean-up or a goto (logically the same as 'finally' in managed languages), both of which are considered bad form. If your practices are to use smart pointers and collections in C++ or another automatic memory system, then there isn't a strong reason for it, and it become all about readability, and more of a judgement call.

我可能会因此被讨厌，但理想情况下，我认为根本不应该有return语句，函数应该只返回它最后一个表达式，在完全理想的情况下，应该只包含一个。

所以不

function name(arg) {
    if (arg.failure?)
        return;

    //code for non failure
}

而是

function name(arg) {
    if (arg.failure?)
        voidConstant
    else {
        //code for non failure


}

不是表达式的if语句和return语句对我来说是一种非常可疑的实践。

为了实现良好的标准和行业最佳实践，我们必须在所有函数中建立正确的返回语句数量。显然，人们一致反对使用一个return语句。所以我建议把它设为2。

如果每个人现在都能检查一下他们的代码，找到任何只有一个出口点的函数，并添加另一个出口点，我将不胜感激。在哪里不重要。

这一变化的结果无疑将是更少的bug，更大的可读性和难以想象的财富从天而降。