Am 15.01.2015 um 18:50 schrieb Maruan Sahyoun:
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?

Yes, that too, of course. (But I perceived the discussion that this was agreed on)

Tilman

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

Reply via email to