Edson's new parser is almost finished. We just found we had hit a brick will with pure ANTLR, it was defying us at every turn. Which caused our language innovation to crawl to a halt. It's been very painful, but once it's done, we'll be back on the language innovation train again :)
Oh, it's been dragging on longer than that. I used it in OPSJ in 1999. :P
--- On Thu, 3/31/11, Michael Neale <michael.neale@gmail.com> wrote:
From: Michael Neale <michael.neale@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [rules-dev] Decision table - Otherwise
To: "Rules Dev List" <rules-dev@lists.jboss.org>
Date: Thursday, March 31, 2011, 4:20 PM
Otherwise has been dragging on since 2006. There are many skeletons in that cave.
I will believe it when I see it !
On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 7:25 AM, Michael Anstis <michael.anstis@gmail.com> wrote:
I bet Edson can't wait to refactor the parser for that ;)
On 31 March 2011 21:11, Mark Proctor <mproctor@codehaus.org> wrote:
on a related note I do plan to add OTHERWISE support at a DRL level, just no time to do it right now. Once it's supported at a DRL level, you won't need to as much work on figuring out the inverse options etc.
Mark
On 31/03/2011 20:25, Michael Anstis wrote:_______________________________________________ rules-dev mailing list rules-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-devHi,
I'm adding support for "otherwise" to (for the time being) the guided decision table in Guvnor.
The idea being if you set a cell to represent "otherwise" the generated rule is the opposite of the accumulation of the other cells; perhaps best explained with an example:-
Person( name == )
Mark
Kris
Geoffrey
<otherwise>
This would generate:-
Person(name not in ("Mark", "Kris", "Geoffrey")
Equals is the simple example, this is my thoughts for the other operators we might like to support:-
- != becomes "in (<list of the other cells' values)"
- < becomes ">= the maximum value of the other cells' values
For example:-
Person ( age < )
10
20
30
<otherwise>
Person ( age >= 30 )
- <= becomes "> the maximum value of the other cells' values
- > becomes "<= the minimum value of the other cells' values
- >= becomes "< the minimum value of the other cells' values
- "in" becomes "not in (<a list of all values contained in all the other cells' lists of values>)"
For example:-
Person ( name in )
Jim, Jack
Lisa, Jane, Paul
<otherwise>
Person ( name not in ("Jim", "Jack", "Lisa", "Jane", "Paul" ) )
- I'm not sure there is a simple solution for "matches" and "soundslike" but welcome advice, although a possibility might be to create a compound field constraint:-
Person ( name soundslike )
Fred
Phil
not Person ( name soundslike "Fred" || soundslike "Phil" )
Would this be considered the most suitable approach?
Inputs and thoughts welcome.
Thanks,
Mike
_______________________________________________
rules-dev mailing list
rules-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
_______________________________________________
rules-dev mailing list
rules-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
--
Michael D Neale
home: www.michaelneale.net
blog: michaelneale.blogspot.com
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
_______________________________________________
rules-dev mailing list
rules-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
_______________________________________________ rules-dev mailing list rules-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev