Re: [rules-dev] Conway example - update to use ruleflow

Are you happy for me to continue with the work? I can plug a Factory in to do as you describe. It depends upon your dead-line for "examples"... As a side, calling WorkingMemory.startProcess(xxx) doesn't clear the agenda so anything previously scheduled gets run along with the process. Is this by design? If so, documenting it (yep, I appreciate where everyone - "the community" - is with that) would have prevented my head scratching last night! ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *From:* rules-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org [mailto:rules-dev-bounces@lists.jboss.org] *On Behalf Of *Mark Proctor *Sent:* 18 May 2007 02:35 *To:* Rules Dev List *Subject:* Re: [rules-dev] Conway example - update to use ruleflow No I only did agenda groups. Key part to the "port" is to share code, so we still have examples for agenda-groups, don't want to loose those. Probalby create a factory of some sort to abstract away the parts in conway that do any rule stuff, so a switch can specify whether the factory is ruleflowgroup or agenda groups. Mark Michael Neale wrote: > Hi Michael. > > I think Mark was working on a "stateful" conways example (the old > was stateless) - I wasn't sure if he got to using ruleflow (just > check first). > > Ruleflow is probably very useful to most people who would have > used agenda-groups - agenda-groups are a stack, which is not > intuitive to most people, but ruleflows are more imperative, so > examples showing that are appreciated. I would almost go as far > as to say that *most* of the time when you want control, you want > ruleflow (you will know if you want agenda). Correct me if I am > wrong, ruleflow is new to me ! > > Michael. > > On 5/16/07, *Anstis, Michael (M.)* <manstis1(a)ford.com > <mailto:manstis1@ford.com>> wrote: > > Just to let you know I am updating the example to use > ruleflow (it looks like one or more rules are wrong too as > the "glider" doesn't glide, so I'll have a look at these also). > > Doesn't look particularly taxing so should have it done very > soon - provided the wife doesn't complain that she's not > seeing much of me in the evenings ;-) > > With kind regards, > > Mike > > > _______________________________________________ > rules-dev mailing list > rules-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:rules-dev@lists.jboss.org> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > rules-dev mailing list > rules-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ rules-dev mailing list rules-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev