On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 10:12 AM, Stephan <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Claus, > > ok, so in order to use dynamic URIs I always have to use the recipientList. > Thanks for clearifying. >
Well thats the solution according to the EIP patterns. > But wouldn't it be easier to allow the simple language in all uris? In order > to better understand Camel, I'm would be interested in the reason against > it. Are there any? > Well we have to be careful to not add to much into the DSL. Also if we just let the String uri be parsed by the simple language, you may end up with exceptions due invalid syntax, and the fact that the uri was supposed to be used as is, eg it could be part of the uri to send to a remote server, for example over HTTP. If we allow you to specify using an expression then the XML DSL may become verbose as you would have to do <to> <simple>xxxxx<simple> </to> And back in the old days the simple language wasn't as versatile as it is today. So maybe for Camel 3.0 we can consider some sort of dynamic to in the DSL. > Thanks in advance. > > Regards > Stephan > -- Claus Ibsen ----------------- FuseSource Email: [email protected] Web: http://fusesource.com Twitter: davsclaus Blog: http://davsclaus.blogspot.com/ Author of Camel in Action: http://www.manning.com/ibsen/
