Yeah, I remember the exchanges from a long time ago about "else" in DRL. IIRC, Mark wasn't keen on the idea.

Anyway, provided my "reversals" make sense it's almost complete in the guided dtable; it only uses SimpleFieldConstraints so doesn't have the complexity of compound constraints :)

On 31 March 2011 22:20, Michael Neale <> wrote:
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 <> wrote:
I bet Edson can't wait to refactor the parser for that ;)

On 31 March 2011 21:11, Mark Proctor <> 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.


On 31/03/2011 20:25, Michael Anstis wrote:

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 == )

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 < )

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

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 )

not Person ( name soundslike "Fred" || soundslike "Phil" )

Would this be considered the most suitable approach?

Inputs and thoughts welcome.



_______________________________________________ rules-dev mailing list

rules-dev mailing list

rules-dev mailing list

Michael D Neale