Am 15.01.2015 um 18:47 schrieb Tilman Hausherr <thaush...@t-online.de>:
> I think that a call that results in printing the usage should result in a > non-null exit code. > fine - but shouldn't an error in processing not also lead to a non-null exit code? > Tilman > > Am 15.01.2015 um 18:13 schrieb Maruan Sahyoun: >> Yes, >> >> current behavior within the tools >> usage(): some tools have a System.exit, some don't and for the ones they >> have the exit code is not always the same. >> -main() there is no System.exit for the ones I looked at in case of an >> error. Only an error message is written to System.err >> >> You'd rather expect System.exit > 0 in case there is an issue in main >> processing and then System.exit as part of usage makes sense. If there is >> none on main there shouldn't be one on usage(). >> >> So I'd remove it on usage() too. >> >> WDYT? >> >> Maruan >> >> Am 15.01.2015 um 18:00 schrieb Andreas Lehmkuehler <andr...@lehmi.de>: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Am 15.01.2015 um 17:20 schrieb John Hewson: >>>> Only if there's a non-zero number used as the argument. >>> Yes, but IMO such a value is only useful if there is any processing issue. >>> Maruans question targets those calls within the usage message which is >>> shown only if there is any issue with the given commandline parameters. >>> >>> I'd remove such calls. >>> >>>> -- John >>>> >>>>> On 15 Jan 2015, at 06:06, Maruan Sahyoun <sahy...@fileaffairs.de> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> do we need System.exit() in our command line tools usage messages? >>>>> Opinions? Don't see a benefit of having them. >>>>> >>>>> BR >>>>> Maruan >>> BR >>> Andreas LEhmkühler >
