Hello-
We are writing rules against complex objects (derived from XML) that contain
nested arrays, notionally like this:
Record {
Detail[] recordDetails;
}
Detail {
Activity[] yearlyActivity;
}
Activity {
int year;
}
Is it really true that I must use a "from" clause to navigate the hierarchy,
assuming that my main program only inserts Record into working memory?
Right now, I have:
rule "Long way using From"
when
$r: Record()
$d: Detail () from $r.recordDetails
$a: Activity (year == 1990) from $d.yearlyActivity
then
...
because I get errors if I try directly navigating the objects:
rule "Short way using Dots"
when
Record (recordDetails.yearlyActivity.year = 1990)
then
...
Is it really true I can't navigate through arrays using dot notation, and I
must use the from clause? This bit of awkwardness makes my rules
significantly harder to read. I was hoping for something like XPath where I
can navigate right through repeating elements.
Apologies in advance for the naieve comparison, and thank for any hints.
--
View this message in context:
http://old.nabble.com/Need-help-with-syntax-for-arrays-in-rules-tp2627384...
Sent from the drools - user mailing list archive at
Nabble.com.