Personally - I would rather get an error when I make a mistake (e.g.
do not
write the DSL correctly) than get get an error for writing perfectly valid code.
[Swindells, Thomas] But it isn't valid DSL code. DSL is normally written by
business users who don't know anything about DRL, this is the target audience and for
these people you don't want them to be able to accidentally do additional logic.
Eclipse does support a DSL expansion window which allows you to find
issues
like misspellings. The current approach requires a total commitment to DSL
even if you want to use it under rare circumstances.
I did note your suggestion about prefixing with '>', but then my RHS looks
different in rule files where I use DSL than it does in files where I do not use
DSL (something I would rather avoid).
Your entire file looks different in DSL than
in a DRL anyway, it's a different language that allows embedding DRL, personally I
think it is a good feature to explicitly need to identify that you know what you are
doing.
Thomas
**************************************************************************************
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
**************************************************************************************