On 1.11.2010 9:07, Wolfgang Laun wrote:
On 1 November 2010 07:45, Samuli
Saarinen<samuli.saarinen(a)remion.com> wrote:
> On 29.10.2010 19:18, Wolfgang Laun wrote:
>> If it were possible to enhance the very same class with different
>> metadata such
>> as @expires, I'd open a JIRA and call it a bug.
>
> Should declaring the same event multiple times throw an exception then
> if it's not allowed?
>
> I don't know if it makes sense to override other metadata but I think
> with expires it could be possible to use the greater value of two
> different declarations as the engine already uses multiple sources for
> calculating the actual expires (explicit vs. implicit).
>
I'm very much against any ad-hoc rules that would silently cover a
situation that might be an error due to oversight. Expiry is currently
a static property of an Event type and I see absolutely no benefit in
having multiple definitions. And why maximum? Why not minimum? Or
average ;-)
-W
From drools fusion UG [1]
"The engine will make this analysis for the whole rulebase and find the
offset for every event type. Whenever an implicit expiration offset
clashes with the explicit expiration offset, then engine will use the
greater of the two."
Can you tell me why maximum is chosen here and not an average?
But I get your point it would not be beneficial to have the kind of
functionality I was hoping for. But I still suggest that the engine
would report the error if event declaration is done more than once as it
is currently possible although the first only counts afaik.
As you can prolly see from the amount of questions I have recently
posted I'm just trying to figure out the way drools works and to add my
few cents to hopefully make it a better project :).
Cheers,
Samuli
[1]
http://downloads.jboss.com/drools/docs/5.1.1.34858.FINAL/drools-fusion/ht...
--
Remion Oy Etävalvontajärjestelmät liiketoiminnan
Samuli Saarinen tehostamiseen
gsm +358 (0)50 3560075
fax +358 (0)3 2125064
www.remion.com