10:16 a.m.
I am trying to write a rather complicated rule via the guided rule editor and
I wonder if it is indeed possible.
The following is a simplified explanation of my scenario:
A 'person' has a numerical property 'age'
In a hypothetical world the following is allowed because the ages of the
people are consecutive:
Person A age = 24
Person B age = 25
Person C age = 26 OK
Person D age = 27
However I would like to write a rule that fires if the ages are not
consecutive, something like this:
Person A age = 24
Person B age = 25
Person C age = 29 NOT OK
Person D age = 27
I am starting with 'From collect all people [p]'.
Any thoughts, comments or similar experiences much apprieciated as I am
pulling my hair out!
Jen
--
View this message in context:
http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Writing-complicated-rules-consecutive-n...
Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
12:35 p.m.
You need an attribute that orders Person facts. For simplicity's sake,
let's call this pnr, a unique number. Then, for any two Person facts where
one pnr is less than another pnr the age of the first must be less than the
age of the second.
It's easy to show that for any two strictly monotonical increasing
sequences <a> and <b> and any pair of index values (i,j) where a[i] < a[j]
also b[i] < b[j] holds.
-W
On 5 November 2011 16:16, LCode <j_whittlesea(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
I am trying to write a rather complicated rule via the guided rule
editor
and
I wonder if it is indeed possible.
The following is a simplified explanation of my scenario:
A 'person' has a numerical property 'age'
In a hypothetical world the following is allowed because the ages of the
people are consecutive:
Person A age = 24
Person B age = 25
Person C age = 26 OK
Person D age = 27
However I would like to write a rule that fires if the ages are not
consecutive, something like this:
Person A age = 24
Person B age = 25
Person C age = 29 NOT OK
Person D age = 27
I am starting with 'From collect all people [p]'.
Any thoughts, comments or similar experiences much apprieciated as I am
pulling my hair out!
Jen
--
View this message in context:
http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Writing-complicated-rules-consecutive-n...
Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
2:29 a.m.
Something like this may work?
p : Person() //for any person
exists( Person(age < p.age)) //who has someone younger than them
not (Person(age == p.age-1)) //there must be someone 1 year younger than them.
then
//there is a gap
end
if you only want it to fire once then you may need an extra exists around it or
something.
Thomas
-----Original Message-----
From: rules-users-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org [mailto:rules-users-
bounces(a)lists.jboss.org] On Behalf Of LCode
Sent: 05 November 2011 15:16
To: rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
Subject: [rules-users] Writing complicated rules - consecutive number
problem
I am trying to write a rather complicated rule via the guided rule editor and I
wonder if it is indeed possible.
The following is a simplified explanation of my scenario:
A 'person' has a numerical property 'age'
In a hypothetical world the following is allowed because the ages of the
people are consecutive:
Person A age = 24
Person B age = 25
Person C age = 26 OK
Person D age = 27
However I would like to write a rule that fires if the ages are not consecutive,
something like this:
Person A age = 24
Person B age = 25
Person C age = 29 NOT OK
Person D age = 27
I am starting with 'From collect all people [p]'.
Any thoughts, comments or similar experiences much apprieciated as I am
pulling my hair out!
Jen
--
View this message in context: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Writing-
complicated-rules-consecutive-number-problem-tp3482704p3482704.html
Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
**************************************************************************************
This message is confidential and intended only for the addressee. If you have received
this message in error, please immediately notify the postmaster(a)nds.com and delete it from
your system as well as any copies. The content of e-mails as well as traffic data may be
monitored by NDS for employment and security purposes. To protect the environment please
do not print this e-mail unless necessary.
NDS Limited. Registered Office: One London Road, Staines, Middlesex, TW18 4EX, United
Kingdom. A company registered in England and Wales. Registered no. 3080780. VAT no. GB 603
8808 40-00
**************************************************************************************
4:52 a.m.
Thomas I have implemented a solution based on your response, for the 'not'
part of the rule I used ...
there must be a person one year younger OR one year older - to allow for the
oldest and younget person at each end of the list.
It seems to work well, thank you both so much for helping.
--
View this message in context:
http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Writing-complicated-rules-consecutive-n...
Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
5279
days inactive
5284
days old
3 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
LCode -
Swindells, Thomas -
Wolfgang Laun