Susan Harkins (406) [Avatar] Offline
#1
Please post errors in the published version of Camel in Action, Second Edition here. If necessary, we'll compile a comprehensive list for everyone's convenience. Thank you!

Susan Harkins
Errata Editor
Manning Publications
529212 (1) [Avatar] Offline
#2
Hi, this is not an error but rather a small improvement on Appendix A.
On page 826 you say:

Notice that all the in.* variables from table A.1 are being considered for removal in Camel 3.0. Instead, use the non-in.* variables.


But then, few pages later, in the "Built-in operators" section you use in.* variables in all examples.


Norbert (3) [Avatar] Offline
#3
Page 137, last code example, closing parenthesis of msg.getHeader("customerId") missing
Norbert (3) [Avatar] Offline
#4
Page 183, line 5 from the bottom:
That means you shouldn’t use the Routing Slip EIP in the route

should be
That means you shouldn’t use the Dynamic Router EIP in the route
Norbert (3) [Avatar] Offline
#5
Page 125, line 10 from bottom:

only the number of parameters would vary.

should be
only the types of parameters would vary.
583339 (2) [Avatar] Offline
#6
Section A.3 says you access exchange properties with "exchange-Property.XXX".

This is *not* correct.

In Camel before 2.15 (the only version I have) it should be: "exchange.XXX".

This error is in several places.

regards,
Russell
davsclaus (413) [Avatar] Offline
#7
Norbert wrote:Page 137, last code example, closing parenthesis of msg.getHeader("customerId") missing


Thanks added to our errata
davsclaus (413) [Avatar] Offline
#8
Norbert wrote:Page 183, line 5 from the bottom:
That means you shouldn’t use the Routing Slip EIP in the route

should be
That means you shouldn’t use the Dynamic Router EIP in the route


Thanks added to our errata
davsclaus (413) [Avatar] Offline
#9
Norbert wrote:Page 125, line 10 from bottom:

only the number of parameters would vary.

should be
only the types of parameters would vary.


An overloaded method can both vary in the number of parameters or the types.
Added to errata.
davsclaus (413) [Avatar] Offline
#10
529212 wrote:Hi, this is not an error but rather a small improvement on Appendix A.
On page 826 you say:

Notice that all the in.* variables from table A.1 are being considered for removal in Camel 3.0. Instead, use the non-in.* variables.


But then, few pages later, in the "Built-in operators" section you use in.* variables in all examples.




Thanks that is a good point. Added to errata
davsclaus (413) [Avatar] Offline
#11
583339 wrote:Section A.3 says you access exchange properties with "exchange-Property.XXX".

This is *not* correct.

In Camel before 2.15 (the only version I have) it should be: "exchange.XXX".

This error is in several places.

regards,
Russell


The book is correct as it is exchangeProperty.XXX

Using exchange.XXX is actually OGNL on the exchange itself where you can call its methods.
davsclaus (413) [Avatar] Offline
#12
Thanks for reporting the mistakes. We will add them to the errata and have it published on the manning website.
We also got a few reports via the manning livebook so they will be included as well.

Merry Christmas

/Claus
Susan Harkins (406) [Avatar] Offline
#13
An errata list for Camel in Action, Second Edition is available at https://raw.githubusercontent.com/camelinaction/camelinaction2/master/errata.txt. Thank you for participating in this process. You help us and other readers!

Regards,
Susan Harkins
Errata Editor