Mailing-List: contact activemq-dev-help@geronimo.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: activemq-dev@geronimo.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: local policy)
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: RE: STOMP and JMSType
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 09:05:01 -0400
Message-ID: 
 <7743F17344E95A4CA78A3E53A7AF496B5C2EFB@corpatsmail1.corp.sensis.com>
Thread-Topic: STOMP and JMSType
Thread-Index: AcaPsesBbDtHoYYKR9mwdnoxuC+8OAAAR4Jg
From: "Mittler, Nathan" <nathan.mittler@sensis.com>
To: <activemq-dev@geronimo.apache.org>

Excellent!  I'm breathing a sigh of relief :)

-----Original Message-----
From: James Strachan [mailto:james.strachan@gmail.com]=20
Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2006 8:55 AM
To: activemq-dev@geronimo.apache.org
Subject: Re: STOMP and JMSType

On 6/14/06, Mittler, Nathan <nathan.mittler@sensis.com> wrote:
> For map messages, on the c++ side of things we would essentially have
to
> write a schema file for the layout of a map message.  The c++ stomp
> client would have to be coded against that schema to properly parse
the
> message.  Unfortunately, we don't have the luxury of using a tool like
> XStream that uses reflection ... makes you wonder why people still
code
> in c++! =3D)

;)

A stomp client could just expose the XML as text; then the client
application can  process it however it wants - as plain text or do
regex on it or use some xml parser of its choosing etc.

My rambling about XStream was really focussed on the Stomp transport
inside the ActiveMQ broker - i.e. the stomp <-> JMS bridge - rather
than the clients. I'd not want to force all Stomp clients to support
some kinda XStream feature. I like the rule that telnet has to be a
compliant Stomp cilent :)

-

James
-------
http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/