Hi
Yes a child output is expected.
Maybe instead of using splitter use message translator, and return
what your want asap, instead of splitting.
On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 9:58 PM, Keith Freeman <8fo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> My route is built in parts from different spots in my code, and at one point
> I do a split:
>
> choice().when(...).bean(...).split().method(splitBean,
> "splitMethod").endChoice().otherwise().bean(...);
>
> This results in a "IllegalArgumentException: Definition has no children on
> Split...".
>
> But at this point in the code I don't know what's going to be added to the
> route, I just want the results of the split() to be forwarded down the
> route. I currently accomplish this by sticking a no-op processor into the
> route:
>
> ...split().method(...).process(new Processor() { public void
> process(Exchange e) { /* no-op */ }}).endChoice()...
>
> Which works fine, but do I really have to do this (it seems kind of ugly and
> inefficient)? Is there something better as a Camel coding idiom that's
> maybe more efficient?
--
Claus Ibsen
-----------------
Red Hat, Inc.
Email: cib...@redhat.com
Twitter: davsclaus
Blog: http://davsclaus.com
Author of Camel in Action: http://www.manning.com/ibsen
