Re: [rules-users] Re: Pattern matching

Sorry... eval(reason == 'override') is not the right way to check for string equality doh. Yes yours is definitely the way to go. I have had the '==' work for many cases. In this case it seems to be not working when there are multiple boolean disjunctions along with them. Jai On Feb 8, 2008 8:52 AM, Jai Vasanth <jaivasanth(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > Very interesting. I tried it too , I dont think its about the '==' > because it seems to be working for eval( reason == 'override'). So it is > more to do with having the eval method call. > Nice find. Not too sure if this is a bug, or if there is a reason why > drools works this way. > > > Thanks > > Jai > > > On Feb 7, 2008 5:43 PM, ST <super_thunder2(a)hotmail.com&gt; wrote: > > > I got it working by using the inline eval expression. The following > > is the > > modified version of the rules. > > > > rule "Remove smaller or non-overriden" > > dialect "java" > > when > > L : Response( $r : value && status != "override" ) > > Response( value > $r || eval (status.equals("override")) ) > > then > > System.out.println("Retracting " + L); > > retract( L ); > > end > > > > The Response class has two fields one is value and the other is > > status. For > > convenience, I added a constructor where the first parameter is the > > value and > > the second is the status. I have added the following objects into the > > working > > memory for testing. > > > > final Response response1 = new Response(5,"override"); > > final Response response2 = new Response(6,"not override"); > > final Response response3 = new Response(7,"not override"); > > final Response response4 = new Response(8,"not override"); > > session.insert( response1 ); > > session.insert( response2 ); > > session.insert( response3 ); > > session.insert( response4 ); > > > > session.fireAllRules(); > > > > The result shows that the object, Response(5,"override"), is the only > > one left > > after the all activated rules have been evaluated. > > > > I am not sure why "==" does not work in this example. Is this a known > > bug? > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > rules-users mailing list > > rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users > > > > _______________________________________________ rules-users mailing list rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users