[rules-users] Comparing names

Ian Spence ianspence at gmail.com
Fri May 15 00:36:51 EDT 2009


Shannon,
Yes correct, adding "WHITE, MARY" would mean an extra name, different to the
other Titles.  Another case maybe to still have same number of name but a
change of for one person, so "JONES, FRED" is now "CLINTON, BILL".

Do you have a different solution to the one proposed by Wolfgang?  I would
prefer for the rule to fire once...

Ian Spence

2009/5/14 Shannon Lal <shannonlal2909 at gmail.com>

> Ian,
> Why would '2100-100' fail by adding WHITE, MARY?  Is it because you would
> have an extra (i.e. 3 ) in the list?  Is this the test that you are trying
> to evaluate?
>
> Thanks
>
> Shannon
>
> 2009/5/14 Ian Spence <ianspence at gmail.com>
>
>> Hello all,
>>
>> I am new to Drools…
>>
>>
>>
>> I have a scenario
>>
>>
>>
>> Each fact object will have the structure:
>>
>>
>>
>> Title
>>
>>    Proprietor Group
>>
>>       Proprietor Name
>>
>>
>>
>> E.g.
>>
>>             2100-100
>>
>>                         J2 ½ share
>>
>>                                     SMITH, JOHN
>>
>>                                     JONES, FRED
>>
>>                         T ½ share
>>
>>                                     BROWN, CHARLIE
>>
>>             2100-101
>>
>>                         J2 ½ share
>>
>>                                     BROWN, CHARLIE
>>
>>                                     JONES, FRED
>>
>>                         T ½ share
>>
>>                                     SMITH, JOHN
>>
>>             2100-102
>>
>>                         T ½ share
>>
>>                                     BROWN, CHARLIE
>>
>>                         J2 ½ share
>>
>>                                     JONES, FRED
>>
>>                                     SMITH, JOHN
>>
>>
>>
>> The group names and the proprietor names must be the same across each
>> Title.  The scenario above is a valid case. A failed case would result for
>> Title 2100-100 if we add an extra Proprietor name e.g. WHITE, MARY.
>>
>>
>>
>> I anticipate having one rule to cater for this.  I am hedging towards the
>> ‘collect’ operator but cannot get a clear picture on how to implement it.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Regards,
>> Ian Spence
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> rules-users mailing list
>> rules-users at lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>
>


-- 
Regards,
Ian Spence
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/rules-users/attachments/20090515/7b3e6876/attachment.html 


More information about the rules-users mailing list