On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 4:25 PM, solimo <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Imagine situation when we have two converters ready to load. The case is
> that any of them can alone do desired conversion but chaining them is going
> to make it a day. For example:
> Converter X can convert type A to B.
> Converter Y can convert type B to C.
>
> Currently if we, for example, send body of type A to to bean's method (via
> bean component)  which expect one argument of type C (or any argument of
> type C annotated @Body) we are going to fail due to type difference and lack
> of converter which can perform type A to C conversion.
>
> Do I miss sth or Camel cannot chain converters (like for example Mule can
> do). From what I've seen browsing code it is only being checked if there is
> (or can be) instanced converter providing type A to C conversion and if not
> then arbitrary argument body will fail.
>

Yes chained converters is not supported.
However the fallback type converters is more wide scoped, where you
can on a case-by-case basis
decide to convert.

Chained converters can be tricky as they can become non optimal, if
the intermediate conversion
takes time/memory etc. It would instead often be better to have A -> C
directly as converter.

Also if there is multiple choices for the chain, which one to pick etc?

Type converters has to be fast and slick.



> Best regards,
> Robert Budźko
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: 
> http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/Camel-converters-chaining-tp5719295.html
> Sent from the Camel - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.



-- 
Claus Ibsen
-----------------
FuseSource
Email: [email protected]
Web: http://fusesource.com
Twitter: davsclaus, fusenews
Blog: http://davsclaus.com
Author of Camel in Action: http://www.manning.com/ibsen

Reply via email to