[rules-users] change "assert" to "insert"+ other changes

[Mark Proctor]

Ok, I'm now doing these changes.


Mark Proctor wrote:
> I've had no further feedback on this, so I'm going to make this change 
> as part of the next milestone release (this week) - these changes are 
> considerable.
>
> assert will change to insert
> -avoid the constant keyword collision with "assert", most languages 
> are seem to support this now
> -will change in both the drl and working memory api
>
> modify to become update
> -instead of workingMemory.modify(FactHandle, Object) it will be 
> workingMemory.update(FactHandle, Object), will change modify to update 
> in drl.
> -this method is now only used for ShadowFact objects, it's  a method 
> to let the engine know that an external object has been updated and to 
> update it's internal cache. and reprocess.
> -avoid keyword collision in MVEL which has nice "modify" sugar now
>
> insertObject, retractObject and updateObject to beome insert, retract 
> and update
> -the Object part seems superflous, might as well remove it, especially 
> as we start to support none Object fact types
> -drl and working memory api will now use the same method names.
>
> added new WorkingMemory modifyRetract and modifyAssert methods
> -allows for non shadow fact objects.
> -When not using shadow facts (although will ofcourse work with shadow 
> facts) you cannot call 'update', or what use to be called 'modify', 
> because we need to know the "old" value of fields so we can retract 
> the from the workign memory. The only safe way is to first retract the 
> object and then assert it. However with the existing api this adds 
> extra work and results in new fact handle. modifyRetract and 
> modifyAssert can now be used together to "simulate" a modify on a none 
> shadow fact object in two parts. First call modifyRetract, then change 
> your field values, then call modifyAssert.
> -MVEL has sugar to do: modify ( person ) { age += 1, location = 
> "london" }, what actually happens here is it first calls modifyRetract 
> then applies the setters and then calles modifyAssert.
>
> Mark
>
> Greg Barton wrote:
>> I think it's a good idea, so ya, change to "insert"
>>
>> GreG
>>
>> --- Mark Proctor <mproctor at codehaus.org> wrote:
>>
>>   
>>> We have been getting querries with regards to jdk
>>> assert collision and 
>>> jboss rules assert, for this reason we are thinking
>>> of changing it to 
>>> insert for 4.0. Further to that its causing language
>>> integrations issues 
>>> for us as we expand pluggeable dialects. For this
>>> reason we are thinking 
>>> of chaning assert to insert, this would be an api
>>> change and a language 
>>> level change. I'd thought I'd throw this out to the
>>> community before we 
>>> do it. This of course breaks backwards
>>> compatability.
>>>
>>> Mark
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> rules-dev mailing list
>>> rules-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
>>>
>>>     
>>
>>
>>
>>        
>> ____________________________________________________________________________________Get the free Yahoo! toolbar and rest assured with the added security of spyware protection.
>> http://new.toolbar.yahoo.com/toolbar/features/norton/index.php
>> _______________________________________________
>> rules-dev mailing list
>> rules-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
>>
>>   
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> rules-dev mailing list
> rules-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
>   

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/rules-users/attachments/20070612/d69019d7/attachment.html