[Brett DiNovi]

Future reader(s),

This topic was revisited amongst my team and I today, with us coming to the below determination after some additional testing with CL 6.1.2.

Order of Processing:

xlateIn -> xlateOut -> Pre-proc -> Action (table call, string, etc) -> Post-proc

Using the above you are able to perform an in-line table call modification so long as you modify the OutVals within a Pre-proc.

[Brett DiNovi]

Thanks for the breakdown, Charlie and Jim.

So, in summary:

– I can’t do any pre-processing to a tables input values

> Because table calls are, in essence, a COPY command, and

> COPY commands are only impacted by tcl procs after the value of OutVals has been set. (i.e. InVals and OutVals are functionally equivalent at tcl start)

> Wipe post-proc on COPY from my brain  😀

I went forward with your suggestion, but stored the temp value in the outbound message rather than a designated variable.  

input -> toupper(input) -> output

output -> table -> output

[Brett DiNovi]

I’m a visual learner, so excuse my attempt at pictures, but is this the “flow” of the processing?

InVals -> pre-proc -> Action (table call, etc) -> post-proc -> OutVals

I guess if it were in that order I’d be able to achieve the processing I’m going for. Does that mean it’s more like the below?

InVals -> Action (table call, etc) -> pre-proc -> post-proc -> OutVals

Something has to take place between pre and post procs though, right? Otherwise there would be no need to distinguish between the two.

[Brett DiNovi]

I’m fairly new to Cloverleaf (but not integration engines), and still trying to figure out the ropes.

If this is the case, then what is the distinction between the pre-proc tcl insert and the post-proc insert? Where does each execute in the stream of commands?

[Brett DiNovi]

I can, and have done that as a temporary solution, but I thought it’d be more appropriate to do it in a single table function.

Instead of:

Call 1: string toupper(input) -> @temp

Call2: @temp -> table -> output

I want:

Call 1: string toupper(input) -> table -> output

The problem is that executing the toupper function on my InVals at pre-proc doesn’t appear to affect the input to the table. It still takes the original value of my InVals.

This isn’t a pressing need, but I like to refine code where possible and wanted to see what could/could not be done to input values of a table in-line.

[Author]

Replies