[rules-users] why define the returnedProcessor twice

[Esteban Aliverti]

Where did you get that code from? That shouldn't even compile!
I've checked both in 5.2 and 6.0 and I couldn't find the code you are
showing:

5.2:
https://github.com/droolsjbpm/droolsjbpm-integration/blob/5.2.x/drools-camel/src/main/java/org/drools/camel/component/DroolsPolicy.java#L86
6.0:
https://github.com/droolsjbpm/droolsjbpm-integration/blob/master/drools-camel-legacy5/src/main/java/org/drools/camel/component/DroolsPolicy.java#L67

Regards,



XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Esteban Aliverti
- Blog @ http://ilesteban.wordpress.com


On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 11:37 AM, scarlettxu <xu_han_zi at 163.com> wrote:

> Hi Expert,
>
> I am a new guy to drools rules and studying the drools camel server now.
> And I see in the DroolsPolicy class located in project
> drools-camel-5.2.0.Final , it define the returnedProcessor twice
>
>   public Processor wrap(RouteContext routeContext, Processor processor)
>   {
>     RouteDefinition routeDef = routeContext.getRoute();
>
>     ToDefinition toDrools = getDroolsNode(routeDef);
> *    Processor returnedProcessor;
>     Processor returnedProcessor;*
>     if (toDrools != null) {
>       returnedProcessor = new DroolsProcess(toDrools.getUri(), processor);
>     }
>     else {
>       returnedProcessor = processor;
>     }
>     return returnedProcessor;
>   }
>
> I wonder is it for special purpose ?
> As I checked from version 5.2.0 Final to 6.0.0RC3
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/why-define-the-returnedProcessor-twice-tp4026406.html
> Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/rules-users/attachments/20131017/dccd9b14/attachment-0001.html