Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-cocoon-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 79182 invoked from network); 2 Nov 2004 08:24:21 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 2 Nov 2004 08:24:21 -0000 Received: (qmail 28375 invoked by uid 500); 2 Nov 2004 08:24:17 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-cocoon-dev-archive@cocoon.apache.org Received: (qmail 28115 invoked by uid 500); 2 Nov 2004 08:24:15 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cocoon.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Reply-To: dev@cocoon.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@cocoon.apache.org Received: (qmail 28100 invoked by uid 99); 2 Nov 2004 08:24:15 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (hermes.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [213.46.255.15] (HELO viefep13-int.chello.at) (213.46.255.15) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.28) with ESMTP; Tue, 02 Nov 2004 00:24:13 -0800 Received: from [192.168.1.31] (really [62.178.239.20]) by viefep13-int.chello.at (InterMail vM.6.01.03.04 201-2131-111-106-20040729) with ESMTP id <20041102082402.IGJR12102.viefep13-int.chello.at@[192.168.1.31]> for ; Tue, 2 Nov 2004 09:24:02 +0100 Message-ID: <41874421.8070100@apache.org> Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 09:24:01 +0100 From: Reinhard Poetz User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.8 (Windows/20040913) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dev@cocoon.apache.org Subject: Re: Switching rhino implementation References: <41868056.8060908@yahoo.de> <21df0a4b8fa1a8b1a28628a.20041101122923.enycu.tbref@www.dslextreme.com> <4186F726.7050308@reverycodes.com> <418715AC.1060107@dslextreme.com> In-Reply-To: <418715AC.1060107@dslextreme.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Ralph Goers wrote: > Vadim Gritsenko wrote: > >> Ralph Goers wrote: >> >>> Is the new implementation compatible (from the user's perspective) with >>> the old version? If so, in my opinion you can just switch it now. If >>> changes will be required then a notice should go out with 2.1.6 in the >>> release notes and the switch would occur in 2.1.7. >> >> >> >> IIRC, there is an incompatibility - there is no "catch {}" construct >> in official rhino. > > > Thanks for the info. Now that you mention it I do remember seeing > something mentioned about that. What is the recommended approach for > users to handle this? You would have to rewrite your flowscripts whenever you use catch(return), catch(continue) and catch(break). -- Reinhard