[rules-users] doubt regarding FORALL and contains operator...

[Sudhir M]

Hi Edson,

Thanks for a quick reply.
Regarding the second second point I will open an issue in JIRA.

Regarding  the first one is that a bug as well? since I haven't assert any
of the vehicle instances  I suppose the rule shouldn't fire right? But the
rule is firing always.

Thanks,
sudhir.

On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 6:49 PM, Edson Tirelli <tirelli at post.com> wrote:

>
>     Regarding 1, it is the expected behavior, since there is no vehicle in
> the wm whose model is not "bmw".
>
>     Regarding 2, probably a bug. Can you please open a JIRA with a test
> case?
>
>     []s
>     Edson
>
> 2009/2/3 Sudhir M <sudhir.cse at gmail.com>
>
>> Hi ALL,
>> We are using drools 4.0.7  for one of our projects. We encountered some
>> issues which I thought are strange.
>>
>> 1. When using FORALL on an entity for which we haven't asserted any of the
>> instances in the working memory the rule always fires. I thought this rule
>> should be evaluted to true only if all the asserted instances satisfy the
>> condition and if we don't insert any of the instances in the working memory
>> it should no fire the rule. Is this the expected behaviour or am I wrong?
>>
>>   ex: rule "rule1"
>>  when
>> forall (
>>  Vehicle( model == "bmw" )
>>  )
>>
>>  then
>>                 System.out.println("in forall");end
>>
>> 2. When using 'contains' operator on array or collection of strings its
>> working fine. But when we use it for an array of primitive type double it
>> gives a classcastexception . Is auto boxing not supported? May be this is
>> fine as it mentioned in the documentation that it works only on Objects. I
>> tried using the array of Double objects, here it doesn't throw an excpetion
>> but the rule wasn't firing. The behaviour was same even if I use a
>> collection of Double objects. Is this a bug or am I missing something?
>>
>>  ex:
>> using Array
>>
>>      rule "OrderArray"
>>  when
>>
>>  Order(valueArray contains 0)
>>
>>  then
>>              System.out.println("OrderArray");
>> end.
>>
>> using Collection
>>
>>
>>  rule "OrderList"
>>  when
>>
>>  Order(valueList contains 0)
>>
>>  then
>>              System.out.println("OrderList");
>> end.
>>
>> May be for collections I can write it as below
>>
>>
>> rule "OrderList"
>>  when
>>
>> $order : Order( $val:valueList)
>>               Double(doubleValue   ==0) from $val
>>
>>  then
>>        System.out.println("OrderList");
>> end.   but this working but not intuitive as these rules were maintained
>> later by a business user it will be easy for him if we contains and also if
>> we can directly use array instead of collections it would be a great as
>> current BOM uses arrays everywhere.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> sudhir.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> rules-users mailing list
>> rules-users at lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>>
>>
>
>
> --
>  Edson Tirelli
>  JBoss Drools Core Development
>  JBoss, a division of Red Hat @ www.jboss.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/20090203/715d5399/attachment.html