Action "launch app" with strange behaviour

Post your questions and help other users.

Moderator: Martin

Post Reply
rainscho
Posts: 4
Joined: 11 Nov 2016 07:37

Action "launch app" with strange behaviour

Post by rainscho » 12 Oct 2018 01:55

Hi all.

If I use the action "launch app" for an non-installed app, I get an error "Could not get launch intent for package com.abc.xyz. Please define a class." and the flow is stopped ... okay.
After adding an exception link from this action "launch app", this error is not notificated anymore ... okay.
But with this added exception link from this action, also the standard link is executed ... my expectation is that only the exception link should be executed.

Is this a bug or a feature?

Any comments welcome! Thanks in advance.

User avatar
Desmanto
Posts: 2709
Joined: 21 Jul 2017 17:50

Re: Action "launch app" with strange behaviour

Post by Desmanto » 12 Oct 2018 05:12

Seem to be featured, the normal connection still executed even after branching to exception. You can add expression after the normal connection to check the error first.

Code: Select all

!contains(exception_message, "Could not get launch intent for package")
False, stop and do nothing. True, continue to your normal connection if the app launch properly.

But I still think that the flow should have branch to the exception and not executing normal connection anymore.
Index of Automagic useful thread List of my other useful posts (and others')
Xiaomi Redmi Note 5 (whyred), AOSP Extended v6.7 build 20200310 Official, Android Pie 9.0, Rooted.

rainscho
Posts: 4
Joined: 11 Nov 2016 07:37

Re: Action "launch app" with strange behaviour

Post by rainscho » 12 Oct 2018 06:16

Hi Desmanto!

Thanks for the work-around. I did not know the variable exception_message.

Let's wait for Martin to comment if it is a bug.

User avatar
Martin
Posts: 4468
Joined: 09 Nov 2012 14:23

Re: Action "launch app" with strange behaviour

Post by Martin » 12 Oct 2018 19:13

That's a bug. The regular connection should not be executed in such a case.
Thanks for reporting! It's fixed in the next build.

Regards,
Martin

Post Reply