[rules-users] NESTED LOOPS Possible

[Wolfgang Laun]

Hi Lisa,

to disallow a (programming language) feature is not adequate; most of
the time a feature exists because it is necessary, and when
circumstances suggest its use, use it, rather than get tangled in
loops and hoops of a workaround. True, coding rules might indeed
blacklist "dangerous" features, but ours always permit to make an
exception provided you can justify it.

You point out the possibility of creating slowdowns with "eval", but
with Drools 5.4, you can create all sorts of mischief in a simple
constraint expression, too. Moreover, you have the option of hiding
everything in a getter...

My "bah" is directed at people who forbid rather than educate. I wrote
it after spending 5 or 10 minutes of creating and running a little
benchmark.

Cheers
Wolfgang



On 22/07/2012, lhorton <LHorton at abclegal.com> wrote:
> do not scoff so quickly, WL.  eval() can be a big performance kill, since
> eval() condition is always executed during rule evaluation.   For example,
> if the eval is on a remote invocation that might hang or be sluggish (long
> timeout) it can drag the server down.
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/NESTED-LOOPS-Possible-tp4018811p4018817.html
> Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>