Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-camel-users-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-camel-users-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C2AF79CCC for ; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 13:39:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 66495 invoked by uid 500); 15 Dec 2014 13:39:21 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-camel-users-archive@camel.apache.org Received: (qmail 66449 invoked by uid 500); 15 Dec 2014 13:39:21 -0000 Mailing-List: contact users-help@camel.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: users@camel.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list users@camel.apache.org Received: (qmail 66423 invoked by uid 99); 15 Dec 2014 13:39:20 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 13:39:20 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.3 required=5.0 tests=URI_HEX X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: error (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [162.253.133.43] (HELO mwork.nabble.com) (162.253.133.43) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 13:39:15 +0000 Received: from msam.nabble.com (unknown [162.253.133.85]) by mwork.nabble.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8CF33DC02D3 for ; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 05:38:34 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2014 06:38:33 -0700 (MST) From: andrewcelerity To: users@camel.apache.org Message-ID: <1418650713433-5760703.post@n5.nabble.com> In-Reply-To: References: <1418399280202-5760638.post@n5.nabble.com> Subject: Re: Changes in Java 8 generics breaking Camel MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org I am using Camel 2.14.0. I do see one problem, though maybe it's just a lack of understanding of the process you're using to compare results. Annotations like @Consume have a retention policy of runtime, meaning the compiler leaves them in the compiled class file (I believe). Your decompiled code does not show any annotations. I fully expect to see the same methods generated via Java 7 and 8, but the annotations on them should be different in the 8 generated byte code. -- View this message in context: http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/Changes-in-Java-8-generics-breaking-Camel-tp5760638p5760703.html Sent from the Camel - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.