Implicit returns are a feature in some languages. They have recently bitten me, so here's my opinion.
Statements, expressions, and returns
Before diving into implicit returns, we must explain two programming concepts influencing them. A lot of literature is available on the subject, so I'll paraphrase one of the existing definitions:
An expression usually refers to a piece of code that can be evaluated to a value. In most programming languages, there are typically three different types of expressions: arithmetic, character, and logical.
A statement refers to a piece of code that executes a specific instruction or tells the computer to complete a task.
Here's a Kotlin snippet:
val y = 10 //1
val x = 2 //1
x + y //2
println(x) //1
- Statement, executes the assignment "task"
- Expression, evaluates to a value, e.g., 12
Functions may or may not return a value. When they do, they use the return
keyword in most programming languages. It's a statement that needs an expression.
In Kotlin, it translates to the following:
fun hello(who: String): String {
return "Hello $who"
}
In this regard, Kotlin is similar to other programming languages with C-like syntax.
Implicit returns
A couple of programming languages add the idea of implicit returns: Kotlin, Rust, Scala, and Ruby are the ones I know about; each has different quirks.
I'm most familiar with Kotlin: you can omit the return
keyword when you switch the syntax from a block body to an expression body. With the latter, you can rewrite the above code as the following:
fun hello(who: String): String = "Hello $who"
Rust also allows implicit returns with a slightly different syntax.
fn hello(who: &str) -> String {
return "Hello ".to_owned() + who; //1
}
fn hello_implicit(who: &str) -> String {
"Hello ".to_owned() + who //2
}
- Explicit return
- Transform the statement in expression by removing the trailing semicolon - implicit return
Let's continue with Kotlin. The expression doesn't need to be a one-liner. You can use more complex expressions:
fun hello(who: String?): String =
if (who == null) "Hello world"
else "Hello $who"
The pitfall
I was writing code lately, and I produced something akin to this snippet:
enum class Constant {
Foo, Bar, Baz
}
fun oops(constant: Constant): String = when (constant) {
Constant.Foo -> "Foo"
else -> {
if (constant == Constant.Bar) "Bar"
"Baz"
}
}
Can you spot the bug?
Let's use the function to make it clear:
fun main() {
println(oops(Constant.Foo))
println(oops(Constant.Bar))
println(oops(Constant.Baz))
}
The results are:
Foo
Baz
Baz
The explanation is relatively straightforward. if (constant == Constant.Bar) "Bar"
does nothing. The following line evaluates to "Bar"
; it implicitly returns the expression. To fix the bug, we need to add an else
to transform the block into an expression:
if (constant == Constant.Bar) "Bar"
else "Baz"
Note that for simpler expressions, the compiler is smart enough to abort with an error:
fun oops(constant: Constant): String =
if (constant == Constant.Bar) "Bar" //1
"Baz"
'if' must have both main and 'else' branches if used as an expression
Conclusion
Implicit return is a powerful syntactic sugar that allows for more concise code. However, concise code doesn't necessarily imply being better code. I firmly believe that explicit code is more maintainable in most situations.
In this case, I was tricked by my code!
Beware of implicit returns.
Go further:
- Expression vs. Statement
- Rust, Ruby, and the Art of Implicit Returns
- To be clear, Rust does not have "implicit returns"
- On the merits of verbosity and the flaws of expressiveness
Originally published at A Java Geek on March 17th, 2024
Top comments (3)
Arguably, implicit code would mean adding the else statement. But I agree with your sentiment. I first encountered implicit returns in Elixir, and I'm still getting used to them.
Generally, I like using expressions over statements, but sometimes you can make assertions at the top of a block which saves a lot of nesting further down using early returns. There are other ways of solving this issue, and I haven't heavily weighed the pros and cons yet.
Good and important article. You present definitions of expression and statement, in that order. The kotlin snippet shows examples, but then you present a statement as 1 and 2 as expression; that is confusing, as the definition uses the reverse order. You can better reverse the order of the definitions.
That's a perfect example on how a small piece of code can easy became very complex.