Hi Raúl,
Thanks for sharing your thoughts:
> In fact, (in my mind) it should be strictly illegal for an InOnly consumer
> to attempt to access the OUT message from an Exchange, even though this is
> not enforced by the Camel APIs right now AFAIK.
I assume with "InOnly consumer" you did actually mean "InOnly producer". And
you exactly did point out where it currently hurts me by the API :-( As I
simply do not get the point
Again my previous stupid example:
Exchange exchange = new DefaultExchange(new DefaultCamelContext());
exchange.setPattern(ExchangePattern.InOnly); <== InOnly is already the
default but just to make my intention clear
exchange.getOut().setBody("Camel");
Just because of the "too friendly" behaviour of the API we did set the OUT
of an Exchange to something != null ALTHOUGH the exchange pattern was
InOnly!
Babak
--
View this message in context:
http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/About-what-to-do-with-the-Response-retrieved-through-a-Producer-when-the-Exchange-is-NOT-out-capable-tp5713946p5714021.html
Sent from the Camel Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
