7 Aug
2007
7 Aug
'07
10:20 a.m.
This is copied out of NEWS file in CVS:
- drop /exit [n] now will end the script execution
exit n will exit with code n (usefull in onreply/onsend routes where
if script code !=0 a reply is generated/the message is sent or to force
script errors)
Lada
SIP wrote:
'break' I could understand.
But not so much 'brake'
Drop is... well... not so intuitive. Exit makes perfect sense. :)
Call me inflexible. ;)
N.
Weiter Leiter wrote:
break appeared early in SER; so, it remained.
drop is a tad newer (?) and probably appeared in the tradition of
packet filtering naming. there is also the more intuitive "exit"
alternative to it.
there is also a "return" alternative for break.
WL.
On 8/6/07, *SIP* <sip(a)arcdiv.com <mailto:sip@arcdiv.com>> wrote:
Weiter Leiter wrote:
_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
Serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
On 8/6/07, *tzieleniewski* <tzieleniewski(a)o2.pl
<mailto:tzieleniewski@o2.pl>
<mailto:tzieleniewski@o2.pl
<mailto:tzieleniewski@o2.pl>>> wrote:
Hi,
Is there any difference in the brake and drop command
behavior in
ser.cfg??
break stops execution of current route, resuming the next outer one
(if any), from where the current was invoked.
drop stops execution of script.
WL.
I'm assuming these are SER 2.0 commands?
Is it possible to have come up with even more convoluted and
non-intuitive names? Perhaps "frog" and "bunny" or
"seratonin" and
"cuisinart" ? I mean, why stop with 'brake,' which is so close to
being
'break' (the command one usually uses in a programming setting to
escape
a loop) and yet... isn't. Or drop... which really doesn't imply to me
'stop execution' as much as it implies ignore an incoming
connection...
or perhaps delete a table.
N.
--
"C is a language that combines all the elegance and power of assembly
language with all the readability and maintainability of assembly
language."