Re: [rules-users] Lazy Planning Value Validation

Thanks for the feedback. I'll look into DefaultDecider to see if I can make a version that suits this need and hold my breath for multi-step score evaluation. For clarity I'd like to address your comment below: ge0ffrey wrote >> If the assignment turns out to be invalid in this check, I'd like to >> remove >> it from the Value Range so it is never considered again. > That's weird: > - either you can predict it's never going to be valid for a certain > entity, no matter the variable state of the other entities => use > @ValueRange(FROM_ENTITY) > - or you can't (not without taking a look at the variable state of the > other entities => invalid for a single solution does not mean you can > just remove it to be never considered again You're right. In this case, I CAN predict that it's never going to be valid for a certain entity. My concern is the computational effort that is required in order to make that decision. I'm afraid that making that determination for every single planning value (a huge space) would take too long. Since many of those planning values are unlikely to yield a valuable score, I was hoping to delay the validation until I know they may be useful in a solution. Would removing a planning value from the value range at run time be problematic?

Jon -- View this message in context: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Lazy-Planning-Value-Validation-tp402409... Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ rules-users mailing list rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users