Re: [rules-users] Non short circuit ANDing

Ø On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 3:49 AM, Stephen Masters <stephen.masters@me.com<mailto:stephen.masters@me.com>> wrote: Ø Ø Ø Ø Ø Cool. Thanks for the code. Thanks indeed Stephen. Another very-quick newbie question (sorry if I should have done the work to research the answer myself): Is it at all possible for listeners, once they have established that a rule has failed, to provide any higher resolution information that could potentially help answer the question "why did this rule fail?" - e.g. identify the specific L-value predicate participant that failed to match, etc.? -----Original Message----- From: rules-users-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org [mailto:rules-users-bounces@lists.jboss.org] On Behalf Of Grant Rettke Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2013 10:10 AM To: Rules Users List Subject: Re: [rules-users] Non short circuit ANDing On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 3:49 AM, Stephen Masters <stephen.masters@me.com<mailto:stephen.masters@me.com>> wrote: Cool. Thanks for the code. The discussion has got me curious, here is the conclusion that I had made about rules engines: 1. Start with normal code. Write it in a way that lets you achieve your goal. Performance is not the primary focus. Work with the business do agile. Get all the auditing you want because it is just normal code. Life goes on. 2. Life is good but the performance is too slow. This is where you cut over to a RETE based rules engine. Does that sound right? _______________________________________________ rules-users mailing list rules-users@lists.jboss.org<mailto:rules-users@lists.jboss.org> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users ________________________________ NOTICE: Morgan Stanley is not acting as a municipal advisor and the opinions or views contained herein are not intended to be, and do not constitute, advice within the meaning of Section 975 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. If you have received this communication in error, please destroy all electronic and paper copies and notify the sender immediately. Mistransmission is not intended to waive confidentiality or privilege. Morgan Stanley reserves the right, to the extent permitted under applicable law, to monitor electronic communications. This message is subject to terms available at the following link: http://www.morganstanley.com/disclaimers If you cannot access these links, please notify us by reply message and we will send the contents to you. By messaging with Morgan Stanley you consent to the foregoing.