Re: [rules-users] doubt regarding FORALL and contains operator...

Regarding 1, it is the expected behavior, since there is no vehicle in the wm whose model is not "bmw". Regarding 2, probably a bug. Can you please open a JIRA with a test case? []s Edson 2009/2/3 Sudhir M <sudhir.cse(a)gmail.com&gt; > Hi ALL, > We are using drools 4.0.7 for one of our projects. We encountered some > issues which I thought are strange. > > 1. When using FORALL on an entity for which we haven't asserted any of the > instances in the working memory the rule always fires. I thought this rule > should be evaluted to true only if all the asserted instances satisfy the > condition and if we don't insert any of the instances in the working memory > it should no fire the rule. Is this the expected behaviour or am I wrong? > > ex: rule "rule1" > when > forall ( > Vehicle( model == "bmw" ) > ) > > then > System.out.println("in forall");end > > 2. When using 'contains' operator on array or collection of strings its > working fine. But when we use it for an array of primitive type double it > gives a classcastexception . Is auto boxing not supported? May be this is > fine as it mentioned in the documentation that it works only on Objects. I > tried using the array of Double objects, here it doesn't throw an excpetion > but the rule wasn't firing. The behaviour was same even if I use a > collection of Double objects. Is this a bug or am I missing something? > > ex: > using Array > > rule "OrderArray" > when > > Order(valueArray contains 0) > > then > System.out.println("OrderArray"); > end. > > using Collection > > > rule "OrderList" > when > > Order(valueList contains 0) > > then > System.out.println("OrderList"); > end. > > May be for collections I can write it as below > > > rule "OrderList" > when > > $order : Order( $val:valueList) > Double(doubleValue ==0) from $val > > then > System.out.println("OrderList"); > end. but this working but not intuitive as these rules were maintained > later by a business user it will be easy for him if we contains and also if > we can directly use array instead of collections it would be a great as > current BOM uses arrays everywhere. > > Thanks, > sudhir. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > rules-users mailing list > rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users > > -- Edson Tirelli JBoss Drools Core Development JBoss, a division of Red Hat @ www.jboss.com _______________________________________________ rules-users mailing list rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users