Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-activemq-users-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 92085 invoked from network); 2 Jul 2007 08:36:32 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 2 Jul 2007 08:36:32 -0000 Received: (qmail 54743 invoked by uid 500); 2 Jul 2007 08:36:34 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-activemq-users-archive@activemq.apache.org Received: (qmail 54712 invoked by uid 500); 2 Jul 2007 08:36:34 -0000 Mailing-List: contact users-help@activemq.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: users@activemq.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list users@activemq.apache.org Received: (qmail 54699 invoked by uid 99); 2 Jul 2007 08:36:34 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (140.211.11.133) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 02 Jul 2007 01:36:34 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of lists@nabble.com designates 216.139.236.158 as permitted sender) Received: from [216.139.236.158] (HELO kuber.nabble.com) (216.139.236.158) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 02 Jul 2007 01:36:30 -0700 Received: from isper.nabble.com ([192.168.236.156]) by kuber.nabble.com with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1I5HOE-0004ec-1b for users@activemq.apache.org; Mon, 02 Jul 2007 01:36:10 -0700 Message-ID: <11390386.post@talk.nabble.com> Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 01:36:10 -0700 (PDT) From: =?UTF-8?Q?M=C3=A5ns_T=C3=A5nneryd?= To: users@activemq.apache.org Subject: Unmarshal of null type in C# implementation throws exception MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Nabble-From: mans.tanneryd@orcsoftware.com X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org The c# implementation of the openwire protocol accepts the marshalling of null types but throws exceptions when trying to unmarshal null types. The java implementation behaves differently since it lets null types fall thru the switch and simply return null. I assume this is a bug, or? /M=C3=A5ns T=C3=A5nneryd --=20 View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Unmarshal-of-null-type-= in-C--implementation-throws-exception-tf4010900s2354.html#a11390386 Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.