[rules-users] Tuples in Agenda Item.

Fri Apr 9 05:13:02 EDT 2010

Presumably ConcreteType1 extends BaseType.  In this case the rule will evaluate true as ConcreateType1 IS A BaseType and therefore the same object matches both the o1 condition and the o2 conditions.  This is why the tuple contains only 1 entry as there was only one unique object matched (o1 == o2).

Thomas

From: rules-users-bounces at lists.jboss.org [mailto:rules-users-bounces at lists.jboss.org] On Behalf Of Rajnikant Gupta
Sent: 09 April 2010 10:01
To: Rules Users List
Subject: Re: [rules-users] Tuples in Agenda Item.

 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<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto:capricorn.raj at gmail.com>> wrote:

From: Rajnikant Gupta <capricorn.raj at gmail.com<mailto:capricorn.raj at gmail.com>>
Subject: [rules-users] Tuples in Agenda Item.
To: rules-users at lists.jboss.org<mailto: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<mailto:rules-users at lists.jboss.org>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users

_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users at lists.jboss.org<mailto:rules-users at lists.jboss.org>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users

_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users at lists.jboss.org<mailto:rules-users at lists.jboss.org>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users

________________________________

**************************************************************************************
This message is confidential and intended only for the addressee. If you have received this message in error, please immediately notify the postmaster at nds.com and delete it from your system as well as any copies. The content of e-mails as well as traffic data may be monitored by NDS for employment and security purposes. To protect the environment please do not print this e-mail unless necessary.

NDS Limited. Registered Office: One London Road, Staines, Middlesex, TW18 4EX, United Kingdom. A company registered in England and Wales. Registered no. 3080780. VAT no. GB 603 8808 40-00
**************************************************************************************

________________________________
This message is confidential and intended only for the addressee. If you have received this message in error, please immediately notify the postmaster at nds.com and delete it from your system as well as any copies. The content of e-mails as well as traffic data may be monitored by NDS for employment and security purposes.
To protect the environment please do not print this e-mail unless necessary.

An NDS Group Limited company. www.nds.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/rules-users/attachments/20100409/7499b1b0/attachment.html 