Re: [rules-dev] Why are fundamental API functions not part of "stable"?

On 9 August 2010 17:31, Mark Proctor<mproctor(a)codehaus.org> wrote: > For now you can cast and unwrap any drools-api interface and get the > legacy concrete implementation that you need. We are aiming for 5.2 for > october, so we can look into exposing some more things then. > In the case of Rule, your proposal doesn't work. To show the set of rules bundled in an agenda group, I tried to StatefulKnowledgeSession session = ...; for( KnowledgePackage knowledgePackage: session.getKnowledgeBase().getKnowledgePackages() ){ for( Rule rule: knowledgePackage.getRules() ){ ??? but it turns out that this "rule" object is of the interface type org.drools.definition.rule.Rule implemented by org.drools.definitions.rule.impl.Rule which is just as meagre as the interface. Dead end, apparently.

Using other classes like Package or RuleBase from the "unstable" part of the API to get at the "real meat" in org.drools.rule.Rule isn't really a way I want to go. Being able to "reverse engineer" one's rules for documentation or filters or similar is an asset which improves Drools usability. Please make do in 5.2. Thanks -W _______________________________________________ rules-dev mailing list rules-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev