<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Greg Barton wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:350977.37135.qm@web81501.mail.mud.yahoo.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">--- On Wed, 2/18/09, Geoffrey De Smet <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:ge0ffrey.spam@gmail.com"><ge0ffrey.spam@gmail.com></a> wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">The current workarounds [to undo-then] are clunky:
- Writing an negative (opposite) rule isn't efficient:
it means declaring the rule twice effectively. Also the
negative rule is usually using lots of or's and
not's which isn't fast.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
This would be made easier by...drum roll please...the else clause! :)
</pre>
</blockquote>
yes we want OPSJ style else statements, edson has an idea on how to do
that, just a matter of time :(<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:350977.37135.qm@web81501.mail.mud.yahoo.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
Now, if there was the else clause plus undo-then/closures you could probably write an entire complex ruleset in one rule. Might as well just use perl, then. :P
</pre>
</blockquote>
heh, that's true you would have potentially encapsulated 4 possible
executions in a single rule.<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:350977.37135.qm@web81501.mail.mud.yahoo.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
_______________________________________________
rules-dev mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:rules-dev@lists.jboss.org">rules-dev@lists.jboss.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev">https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>