2:59 a.m.
Hi Mark,
here now:
Ooh, it seems Eclipse outwitted me once again. But I think I made it on the
2nd try...
-W
PS:
(1) A decision on the matter of DSL variables would be appreciated. I'm
currently
developing a non-trivial DSL, and learning a lot about what's needed for a
*real world *application. Most importantly, some means of structuring the
DSL definition, so that they can be applied distinctively to specific groups
of
rules. This reduces the risk of "ricochets" if you know what I mean.
I've thought about proposing an entirely new approach, based on DRL
syntactic
entities, i.e., the expansion of a DSL phrase must be a "medium level"
non-terminal
of the DRL language. But this certainly restricts phrase parameters to
terminals.
If it's too sophisticated, you end up with a parser/compiler almost as nasty
as ANTLR3.
(2) I haven't forgotten the spreadsheet fixes. There's another relic I
found: some of
the column keywords have single letter alternatives (e.g. "U" for
"no-loop",
"X" for
"activation-group"). Should I retain them - they are NOT documented in
Expert.
Should I add timer(int:)? Duration is deprecated, I'll leave this in but it
ought to
be marked clearly as such in the documentation, at least.
Please advise - I can live with everything - non of this is important for
my company,
but I want to get the fixes and additions out of my thinning hair ;-)
2:55 a.m.
New subject: timer and duration tests releases- and please note the PS!
On 11/12/2010 08:59, Wolfgang Laun wrote:
Hi Mark,
here now:
Ooh, it seems Eclipse outwitted me once again. But I think I made it
on the 2nd try...
-W
I just ran this on my trunk and the tests passed......
So i'm removing the FIXME.
Mark
PS:
(1) A decision on the matter of DSL variables would be appreciated.
I'm currently
developing a non-trivial DSL, and learning a lot about what's needed for a
/real world /application. Most importantly, some means of structuring the
DSL definition, so that they can be applied distinctively to specific
groups of
rules. This reduces the risk of "ricochets" if you know what I mean.
I've thought about proposing an entirely new approach, based on DRL
syntactic
entities, i.e., the expansion of a DSL phrase must be a "medium level"
non-terminal
of the DRL language. But this certainly restricts phrase parameters to
terminals.
If it's too sophisticated, you end up with a parser/compiler almost as
nasty as ANTLR3.
(2) I haven't forgotten the spreadsheet fixes. There's another relic I
found: some of
the column keywords have single letter alternatives (e.g. "U" for
"no-loop", "X" for
"activation-group"). Should I retain them - they are NOT documented in
Expert.
Should I add timer(int:)? Duration is deprecated, I'll leave this in
but it ought to
be marked clearly as such in the documentation, at least.
Please advise - I can live with everything - non of this is important
for my company,
but I want to get the fixes and additions out of my thinning hair ;-)
_______________________________________________
rules-dev mailing list
rules-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
3:16 a.m.
But you did have to fix things in the Engine?
-W
On 12 December 2010 09:55, Mark Proctor <mproctor(a)codehaus.org> wrote:
On 11/12/2010 08:59, Wolfgang Laun wrote:
Hi Mark,
here now:
Ooh, it seems Eclipse outwitted me once again. But I think I made it on the
2nd try...
-W
I just ran this on my trunk and the tests passed......
So i'm removing the FIXME.
Mark
PS:
(1) A decision on the matter of DSL variables would be appreciated. I'm
currently
developing a non-trivial DSL, and learning a lot about what's needed for a
*real world *application. Most importantly, some means of structuring the
DSL definition, so that they can be applied distinctively to specific
groups of
rules. This reduces the risk of "ricochets" if you know what I mean.
I've thought about proposing an entirely new approach, based on DRL
syntactic
entities, i.e., the expansion of a DSL phrase must be a "medium level"
non-terminal
of the DRL language. But this certainly restricts phrase parameters to
terminals.
If it's too sophisticated, you end up with a parser/compiler almost as
nasty as ANTLR3.
(2) I haven't forgotten the spreadsheet fixes. There's another relic I
found: some of
the column keywords have single letter alternatives (e.g. "U" for
"no-loop", "X" for
"activation-group"). Should I retain them - they are NOT documented in
Expert.
Should I add timer(int:)? Duration is deprecated, I'll leave this in but it
ought to
be marked clearly as such in the documentation, at least.
Please advise - I can live with everything - non of this is important for
my company,
but I want to get the fixes and additions out of my thinning hair ;-)
_______________________________________________
rules-dev mailing
listrules-dev@lists.jboss.orghttps://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
5094
days inactive
5095
days old
2 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
Mark Proctor -
Wolfgang Laun