On 04/03/2008, James Strachan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 04/03/2008, georgiosgeorgiadis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Thanks James, at the end, yes, I decided to do it with the type converter > > which gives me more control over what is called and > > what is passed around. How I have decided, as these objects that i am > using > > have multiple methods, is that I pass the methodName in the message's > header > > as "@method" and with the method parameters passed as an array of objects > as > > the message body. > > > > The type converter will use reflection to resolve actual method > invocations > > and propagate correctly and returning correctly. > > > Great. There is a BeanInvocation object you can use as the payload > BTW which tries to do that too; though currently that takes a Method > and Object[] arguments. > > Another approach is to send a message with the header > "org.apache.camel.MethodName" set to the method name to invoke and the > body as the Object[] arguments and it should then work using the > existing bean invocation?
This currently doesn't work :) I've added a test case (BeanMethodWithMultipleParametersTest) to try this out and unfortunately the current BeanProcessor logic just tries to match to a single body parameter. I've raised a JIRA to fix this use case... https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-355 -- James ------- http://macstrac.blogspot.com/ Open Source Integration http://open.iona.com
