Need to know good practice should i follow on below code

Question

i have code as :

 int good_practice(void)
    {
      if (somethings == TRUE)
       return true;  //i am asked to remove it coz it will reach anyhow at end and do same but i feels it is good practice and why should i wait for end?
      else
       return false
      }
     }
     return true; 
    }

i am asked remove first return since it will ultimately reach end of function and will return true.Is this good ?

what i feel why do i need to wait for cpu to go at end of function and return though i can do early.if i have decide to return with some condition why should i return from end why not there itself why to wait for end ?

And also if i am wait for end the i increase time complexity(i know it won't make any difference) but no of instruction is also increased.

please help me to get out of this confusion?

Answer 1

This is called an “early return” and I don't think there is a clear consensus.

Pros:

• You can't execute some other code by mistake if you return early.
• If you are reading this particular execution branch, the early return makes the flow more explicit.
• It's also possible to decrease the indent level by returning early.

Cons:

• When you're looking at the whole function, it's easier to miss an early return.

There are some similar previous questions about early returns, see here for example .

Answer 2

You are asked to remove the first return true because you can simply check like this, and not have an additional redundant return true :

int good_practice(void) {
    if(!somethings) { 
        return false;
    }
    return true;
}

Anyway, the code in question is pretty much redundant .

You can replace it with an even better version, like this:

int good_practice(void)
{
    return somethings;
}

About the early return:

Its generally better to have one return at the end, because the performance gained, when returning earlier is nowhere near the gained readability by having one return only .

(Thats just my own experience though).