Hum. Wouldn't it be just as useful if a Map as used as the 2nd argument instead of a MapMessage? I'm just thinking that MapMessage has alot more overhead than a simple MAP.
On 6/14/06, jhakim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The JMS MapMessage API already contains the method setObject(name, val). For nested MapMessage, the second argument - val - would simply be a MapMessage. No need to clutter the API with yet another method. By the way, this is just what TIBCO EMS provides. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Nested-MapMessage-t1788442.html#a4875002 Sent from the ActiveMQ - Dev forum at Nabble.com.
-- Regards, Hiram Blog: http://hiramchirino.com
