[rules-users] Tuples in Agenda Item.

Fri Apr 9 05:00:52 EDT 2010

 DroolsWorkingMemory is our custom class which contains asserted facts and
other custom objects based on our project requirement. It should not be
confused with "WorkingMemory" of Drools.

For issue 1, I assume that if I overwrite one field in ConcreteType1 to a
different value than that in BaseType, they are treated as diferrent
objects. Consider the xml snapshot of the two objects for eg:

*BaseType* object:

<com.parentchild.BaseType>
    <Boolean>false</Boolean>
    <Date>2010-04-09T00:00:00</Date>
    <String>a</String>
    <Double>0.0</Double>
</com.parentchild.BaseType>

*ConcreteType1* object:

<com.parentchild.ConcreteType1>
    <Boolean>false</Boolean>
    <Date>2010-04-09T00:00:00</Date>
    <String>b</String>
    <Double>0.0</Double>
    <ConcreteType1Boolean>false</ConcreteType1Boolean>
</com.parentchild.ConcreteType1>

so I assume I have two objects BaseType(with value of String as "a") and
ConcreteType1 object (with value of String as "b"). The rule should evaluate
to false on the above assumption.

For issue 2, Sorry If i have misled, my only question was why does the Tuple
inside Agenda Item show only ConcreteType1 and not the BaseType, If both of
them are inserted in WorkingMemory. Doesn't the tuple contain all the
objects inserted in WM.

Regards,

Rajnikant Gupta

2010/4/9 Wolfgang Laun <wolfgang.laun at gmail.com>

> Regarding Issue 1:
> Even if you do have different objects of ConcreteType1, the rule is fired
> for each of them, since each of these is equal to itself in terms of the
> BaseType.
>
> I also fail to understand Issue 2. But perhaps your misconception about
> base type and subtype matching is also responsible for that.
>
> Rule "s" looks strange for more than one reason. What is the
> DroolsWorkingMemory() pattern supposed to achieve? Is it a general trigger
> so that the rule only fires if one such object is present?
>
> Leaving base and extended types aside, testing for the equality of two
> objects of the same type must be done much more carefully. Assuming three
> objects of TypeX, x1, x2, x3 with x1.equals(x2) and NOT x1.equals(x3) and a
> rule like this:
>
> rule "xxx"
> when
>    o1 : TypeX()
>    o2 : TypeX()
>    eval( o1.equals( o2 ) )
> then
>   ...
>
> This rule will fire 5 times, with the following activations:
>    <x1,x1>, <x2,x2>, <x3,x3>, <x1,x2>, <x2,x1>.
>
> Using, e.g.,
>    o2:TypeX( this != o1 )
> reduces this to two firings.
>
> -W
>
>
> 2010/4/9 Rajnikant Gupta <capricorn.raj at gmail.com>
>
>  Hi,
>> **
>> Sorry for not being very clear. Here's the rule which I run:
>> **
>> **
>> *package rr*
>> *import com.thirdpillar.common.util.DroolsWorkingMemoryimport
>> com.parentchild.BaseType*
>> *import com.parentchild.ConcreteType1 *
>> **
>> *rule "s"*
>> *no-loop true *
>> *salience 999999 *
>> **
>> *when*
>> *DroolsWorkingMemory:DroolsWorkingMemory()*
>> *BaseType:BaseType()*
>> *ConcreteType1:ConcreteType1()*
>> *eval (*
>> *(*
>> *((BaseType.equals(ConcreteType1)))*
>> *)*
>> *)*
>> *then*
>> *BaseType.setString("Blah Blah!");*
>> *end *
>>
>> where *ConcreteType1 *extends *BaseType. *
>> **
>> *Issues:*
>> 1. Even for different values for fields in *ConcreteType1* and *BaseType,
>> *the rule gets fired.
>>
>> 2. I also do audit for the rules for which i need tuples so that I can
>> extract the objects out of it and evaluate the expression against Mvel. But
>> the tuple shows me only the *ConcreteType1* instance not the *BaseType. *Thus
>> getting wrong audit.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Rajnikant Gupta
>> Sr. Software Engineer
>> GlobalLogic,Noida
>> 09899530562
>>
>> http://rkthinks.wordpress.com/
>>
>>
>> 2010/4/9 Greg Barton <greg_barton at yahoo.com>
>>
>>   We need some rule code to get a better idea of what's going on.  Can
>>> you post some?
>>>
>>> --- On *Thu, 4/8/10, Rajnikant Gupta <capricorn.raj at gmail.com>* wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> From: Rajnikant Gupta <capricorn.raj at gmail.com>
>>> Subject: [rules-users] Tuples in Agenda Item.
>>> To: rules-users at lists.jboss.org
>>> Date: Thursday, April 8, 2010, 1:36 PM
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I have a doubt regarding tuples. I created a rule using complex types
>>> objects. I am comparing two complex type objecs which have parent-child
>>> relationship eg. "ParentType.equals(ChildType)". I expect this to follow
>>> java rule which allows such comparision. Now when I run the rules with
>>> different values for fields in ParentType and ChildType (which means the
>>> rule should fail) to my surprise it evals to TRUE. Also upon inspection, the
>>> tuple shows me only the ChildType instance not the ParentType.
>>>
>>> I would appreciate any help on this.
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Rajnikant
>>>
>>> -----Inline Attachment Follows-----
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> rules-users mailing list
>>> rules-users at lists.jboss.org<http://mc/compose?to=rules-users@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
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/rules-users/attachments/20100409/45bea7c6/attachment.html 