Can you make few rules for us to test this with.
I have to say that the verifier is not perfect when it searches for redundancy, so your
rules might be too complex for it at the moment.
Toni
On Mar 16, 2011, at 1:29 PM, FrankVhh wrote:
Hi Wolfgang,
Yes, you are absolutely right about the path mistake. Can't believe I missed
that. Fixing it removes the errors from the verifier.
However, it still does not return the expected outputs...
System.out.println(result.getVerifierData().getAll().isEmpty()); => returns
false, which is as expected
But the following statement still does not return anything.
for (VerifierMessageBase base : result
.getBySeverity(Severity.WARNING)) {
System.out.println(base);
}
I'm sorry to take so much of your time, I really appreciate your efforts.
Regards,
Frank
--
View this message in context:
http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/Drools-verifier-tp268...
Sent from the Drools - User mailing list archive at
Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users