I'm refactoring a large javascript document that I picked up from an open source project. A number of functions use inconsistent return statements. Here's a simple example of what I mean:
var func = function(param) {
if (!param) {
return;
}
// do stuff
return true;
}
Sometimes the functions return boolean, sometimes strings or other things. Usually they are inconsistently paired with a simple return;
statement inside of a conditional.
The problem is that the code is complex. It is a parser that uses a multitude of unique RegEx matches, creates and destroys DOM nodes on the fly, etc. Preliminary testing shows that, in the above example, I could change the return;
statement to become return false;
, but I'm concerned that I may not realize that it had a negative impact (i.e. some feature stopped working) on the script until much later.
So my questions: Is there a benefit to using a blank return statement? Could this have been intentionally coded this way or was it just lazy? Can I change them all to return false;
, or return null;
or do I need to dig through every call and find out what they are doing with the results of those functions?
Using return
without a value will return the value undefined
.
If the value is evaluated as a boolean, undefined
will work as false
, but if the value for example is compared to false
, you will get a different behaviour:
var x; // x is undefined
alert(x); // shows "undefined"
alert(!x); // shows "true"
alert(x==false); // shows "false"
So, while the code should logically return true
or false
, not true
or undefined
, you can't just change return;
to return false;
without checking how the return value is used.