Make some ruff fixes

[cclauss]

Describe your change:

ruff --select=RET501,RET502,RET503,SIM101,SIM102,SIM108,SIM109,SIM110,SIM117,SIM118,SIM201,SIM300,PD002,RUF005 --fix .

• Add an algorithm?
• Fix a bug or typo in an existing algorithm?
• Documentation change?

Checklist:

• I have read CONTRIBUTING.md.
• This pull request is all my own work -- I have not plagiarized.
• I know that pull requests will not be merged if they fail the automated tests.
• This PR only changes one algorithm file. To ease review, please open separate PRs for separate algorithms.
• All new Python files are placed inside an existing directory.
• All filenames are in all lowercase characters with no spaces or dashes.
• All functions and variable names follow Python naming conventions.
• All function parameters and return values are annotated with Python type hints.
• All functions have doctests that pass the automated testing.
• All new algorithms include at least one URL that points to Wikipedia or another similar explanation.
• If this pull request resolves one or more open issues then the commit message contains Fixes: #{$ISSUE_NO}.

[dhruvmanila]

Looks good. There's just one thing I noticed which is that some places have explicit return None while others implicit return. I think we should adopt one or the other. What do you think?

[cclauss]

Those rules cover different situations: implicit returns and unnecessary returns. Sometimes return None should be added and other times return None should be removed. So let's follow the modifications that the rules recommend.

• https://beta.ruff.rs/docs/rules/#flake8-return-ret

Code	Name	Description	Fix?
RET501	unnecessary-return-none	Do not explicitly return None in function if it is the only possible return value	🛠
RET502	implicit-return-value	Do not implicitly return None in function able to return non-None value	🛠
RET503	implicit-return	Missing explicit return at the end of function able to return non-None value	🛠

[dhruvmanila]

The rules exists, but it depends on the project, the maintainers and the audience through which the choice of rules need to be made. Just because a rule exist, doesn't mean it's a necessary thing to do.

This is what I think but it's upto you. If you think it's fine, then ok, but I think consistency matters.

[cclauss]

I think that the rules make sense as they are.

For functions that never return a value, it is unnecessary to add an extra line at the end.
For functions that return a value, they should not implicitly return None (explicit is better than implicit).