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.

拥有多个出口点本质上与使用GOTO是一样的。这是不是件坏事取决于你对迅猛龙的看法。

Structured programming says you should only ever have one return statement per function. This is to limit the complexity. Many people such as Martin Fowler argue that it is simpler to write functions with multiple return statements. He presents this argument in the classic refactoring book he wrote. This works well if you follow his other advice and write small functions. I agree with this point of view and only strict structured programming purists adhere to single return statements per function.

这主要是Fortran的遗留问题，在Fortran中，可以将多个语句标签传递给一个函数，这样函数就可以返回其中任何一个。

所以这种代码是完全有效的

       CALL SOMESUB(ARG1, 101, 102, 103)
C Some code
 101   CONTINUE
C Some more code
 102   CONTINUE
C Yet more code
 103   CONTINUE
C You get the general idea

但是被调用的函数决定了你的代码路径。有效率呢?可能。可维护的?不。

这就是该规则的来源(顺便说一下，一个函数没有多个入口点，这在fortran和汇编程序中是可能的，但在C中不可能)。

然而，它的措辞看起来像是可以应用到其他语言(关于多个入口点的那个不能应用到其他语言，所以它不是一个真正的程序)。所以这条规则被保留了下来，即使它指的是一个完全不同的问题，而且不适用。

对于更结构化的语言，需要放弃这个规则，或者至少考虑更多。当然，一个充满返回值的函数很难理解，但在开始时返回不是问题。在一些c++编译器中，如果你只从一个地方返回一个值，那么一个返回点可能会生成更好的代码。

但是最初的规则被误解了，被误用了。也不再相关了。

我通常支持多个return语句。它们是最容易阅读的。

在某些情况下，这并不好。有时从函数返回可能非常复杂。我记得有一种情况，所有函数都必须链接到多个不同的库。一个库期望返回值是错误/状态代码，而其他库则不期望。使用一个return语句可以节省时间。

我很惊讶没人提到goto。Goto并不是每个人都想让你相信的编程的祸害。如果必须在每个函数中只有一个return语句，请将它放在末尾，并根据需要使用gotos跳转到该return语句。绝对避免标记和箭头编程，它们既丑陋又运行缓慢。

是否有充分的理由说明在函数中只有一个return语句是一个更好的实践?

是的，有:

The single exit point gives an excellent place to assert your post-conditions. Being able to put a debugger breakpoint on the one return at the end of the function is often useful. Fewer returns means less complexity. Linear code is generally simpler to understand. If trying to simplify a function to a single return causes complexity, then that's incentive to refactor to smaller, more general, easier-to-understand functions. If you're in a language without destructors or if you don't use RAII, then a single return reduces the number of places you have to clean up. Some languages require a single exit point (e.g., Pascal and Eiffel).

这个问题通常被提出为多个返回或深度嵌套的if语句之间的错误二分法。几乎总有第三种解决方案，它是线性的(没有深度嵌套)，只有一个出口点。

更新:MISRA的指导方针显然也提倡单次退出。

需要澄清的是，我并不是说拥有多个回报总是错误的。但如果有其他等价的解决方案，有很多很好的理由选择单一回报的方案。