The way Workflows work today has been causing me some serious problems. In particular, I wish to return execution from a workflow at any given time, using a “Return” statement, like if it was a real function.
They are very much like functions already, they take in and return parameters, but we’re hamstrung when it comes to flow control.
We’ve been earning more and more trust from our colleagues, which is awesome, but it also means we’re dealing with ever more complex business logic. We need tools to cope with that.
Thanks!
I will leave it up to @alexandru to comment on it further, but I will share some thoughts first.
The way to achieve it now is to either use a flowchart that will end the currently invoked workflow based on specific conditions or to base your process on state machines.
Not allowing for an abrupt exit out of a workflow might be related to the way the processes currently work, which is pretty much based on a sequential execution of each action. One could use an argument that adding such functionality would actually reduce the “readability” of the processes (kind of a goto type of discussion).
Either way, I’ll add it to our internal tracker for future consideration
We have plans to create a Return activity that will end execution for the current workflow and return to where it was invoked. Most likely it will be available later this year.
It is now available starting with Studio and Robot 2023.8. To clarify - the activity is available starting from System 23.8.1-preview, but it requires the underlying Robot support which was introduced in the same version.
For Enterprises, the next closest version to support it is the upcoming 2023.10.
Sadly this feature did not make it to good old Windows Legacy projects. Not surprising, but given this is such a simple and useful activity, do you know if there are any plans to make it available?
Yeah, but thats not a good reason to stay on Legacy.
You are asking for new features to be added to a format that is end of life and being deprecated.
In order to try to justify using such a format I feel you’d need to demonstrate why its worth doubling the development work to implement features in the legacy version.
The client not updating is not a good reason, nor are the activities not being available.
I’d advice you to strongly push the client to update before your hands are tied and you are forced to upgrade, plus you get to use all the cool new features.
Any packages not updated by now should be considered too risky as they clearly aren’t getting support, so I’d find a way to remove them.
There’s a lot of things that aren’t working properly when switching from Legacy to non-legacy Windows projects, activities that are not available, etc.
Moreover, in some cases they changed the functionality and it’s not feasible anymore, and UiPath openly said that they don’t have any plans to keep the functionality compaible in the old way it was.
That’s been the case we’ve been suffering in our organization since late summer, when forced to switch from a legacy project, with the Invoke Power Shell activity. Context is now lost amongs subsequent Powershell calls in the same project, thus rendering unusable with Powershell packages that need it, like those ones making use of authentication. And they openly acknowledge they are not bother fixing it after promising so. So we find ourselves stuck with no solution, even if the organization is willing to renew the license for 3 years.
Ok, but that is completely different that the situtation here.
You are complaining that existing functionality is broken or not working as expected, that is a legitimate reason to want to not switch.
Thats different than asking for new features and the argument that you aren’t upgrading due to items from the Marketplace, which don’t get official support, not being updated.
Lets say the Excel Bela Reva stuff, which is very popular, didnt get updated. Why is that UiPath’s problem? They shouldnt need to support a coding format that is grossly out of date because of that.
We are still waaaaaaay behind the latest .net features, I’d rather UiPath invested their time in fixing issues like your to make you able to migrate and getting us further updated rather than trying to duplicate features in an EOL version.
Of course I understand what you point out, @Jon_Smith, but that’s different to my case, as I’m talking about official packages/activities with no alternatives… Just bumped into this thread and wanted to point out.
I’ve not any issues with any official packages so I would be interested to know where the problems for you are or functionality that is being lost? I’ve been very happy with the migration, even though actually migrating was painful.
Hello, I was waiting for this activity for a very long time. So happy to have it in 23.10 now, thanks !
It will helps a lot readability of sequential workflows imo !
ashokkarale
anjani_priya
Dheerendra_vishwakarma
Parvathy
Aakash_Singh_Rawat
Luis_Fernando
bjorn2390
neco
pere
Shiva_Nikhil