Dear contributors,

  this rule is expected to match a sequence of 2 consecutive events:

rule "test"
    when
        // a)
        $ev1 : LocalizationEvent( type == TYPE.HINT,  $target : target  )
from entry-point "events/localization"
        $ev2 : LocalizationEvent( type == TYPE.HINT, target == $target, this
after $ev1 ) from entry-point "events/localization"
        // b)
        // Ev1 directly followed by ev2: no other HINT in between
        not( LocalizationEvent( type == TYPE.HINT, target == $target, this
after $ev1, this before $ev2 )  from entry-point "events/localization" )
    then
      do()
end

 The second event is interpreted as a "confirmation" of the first event (a).
 No other (deviating) event is allowed between them (b). With this
restriction
 in place, the rule requires a sequence of 3 input events for activation,
otherwise
 2 events are sufficient (as expected). The events are ordered correctly and
it is
 not obvious, why a third event is needed since the interval between ev1 and
ev2 is
 closed ? This leads to an unnecessary delay in rule activation.. How could
this be
 avoided and are there other approaches to match a concrete event sequence
pattern ?

 Many thanks
   Jaro



--
View this message in context: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Matching-consecutive-events-tp4018980.html
Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users