Hi, Camel bean just provides a good application layer for the user to inject their business logic, so the user won’t need to deal with processor and exchange in their code.
If you want to read about the message header and properties, please take some time to check out the bean binding[1] page. The only short coming is you bean method cannot change the exchange directly. [1]http://camel.apache.org/bean-binding.html -- Willem Jiang Red Hat, Inc. Web: http://www.redhat.com Blog: http://willemjiang.blogspot.com (English) http://jnn.iteye.com (Chinese) Twitter: willemjiang Weibo: 姜宁willem On September 18, 2014 at 2:12:22 AM, Craig Taylor (ctalk...@ctalkobt.net) wrote: > I've seen a number of web statements by individuals favoring the bean() > invocations over calling a processor. I believe the arguments / rational > stated is that of simplicity, interaction with other libraries etc. > > I personally prefer processor in that it allows me to alter / affect more > than just the result body, eg: properties and headers. I'm not aware of any > means to do this within a bean() invocation. > > Can this be done and is there any rational of choosing one over the other? > > > -- > ------------------------------------------- > Craig Taylor > ctalk...@ctalkobt.net >
