On 7 April 2011 07:14, Mark Proctor
<mproctor@codehaus.org>
wrote:
I'm at the stage where I cannot make this work in a robust way
when
using the java dialect:
modify( getFact( var ) ) { setName("yoda") }
The problem is we have to infer the type of the expression. If
the
expression is complex using variables in methods, we get
method
ambiguity if we don't know all variable types. Once we have
the
expression type we rewrite this as:
Person obj = ( Person) getFact(var);
obj.setName( "yoda" );
Edson did this originally by using mvel to analyse the
expression. The
problem is that if the expression uses any local variables, we
don't
know what those are. So we need to analyse the entire
consequence, we
started to do this with MVEL but we have reached one too many
stumbling
blocks - most recent of those is MVEL does not understand java
generics.
I've put in about 3 weeks trying to solve this with mvel, and
now had to
stop. When MVEL adds generics we can hopefully resume this
work again.
For now i'm having to roll back to our current behaviour. The
positive
news is that no one has reported issues with this. I'm
guessing most
people use just the fact instance, not expressions, and if
they use an
expression it's simple. So the brittleness is not showing up.
Anyway the work around for now is to explicitley cast, that
should
resolve the issue, if it comes up for anyone. I'm tempted to
say that
expressions are only officially supported when used with
casting.
Atleast until we can do robust type inference:
modify( (Person) getFact( var ) ) { setName("yoda") }
Mark
_______________________________________________
rules-dev mailing list
rules-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev