The usual (and only reasonable way) to "set" a variable in the LHS is to
bind it to a Drools variable,
including things like:
...
$x : String() from /* expression here */
...
any usage of the "=" operator is generally suspicious..
but I'm not sure I have understood your use case completely.. :)
On 06/04/2013 05:59 PM, Stephen Masters wrote:
Thanks for the cheat idea Mike. I wasn't really expecting any
help
from the tooling itself. Just hoping that there might be some trickery
within the DSL that I could try, to generate some code which would set
up a variable for me.
Unfortunately I do need to combine LHS sentences and multiple RHS
sentences, so your idea isn't really an option in this case. :(
As it is I have created a little enumeration in the RHS sentence, and
it's not looking too bad. At least, with some selective wording, it
doesn't look completely redundant!
Steve
On 4 Jun 2013, at 16:33, Michael Anstis <michael.anstis(a)gmail.com
<mailto:michael.anstis@gmail.com>> wrote:
> This would need to be provided by the tooling; I don't think it's
> something that's even remotely possible at runtime (unless you stored
> the field name in a Fact and used reflection on the RHS).
>
> That said (and you're going to guess my next comment) this is not
> provided in the guided editors. Depending on how complex your DSLs
> are and whether users need to combine DSL Sentences; IDK if a "cheat"
> works:
>
> [when]Do something with {field} and {value}=$f :
> Fact({field}=={value} then $f.{field} = {value}
>
> I've not tried it; nor know whether it fits your requirements.. but a
> hack worth trying?
>
>
> On 3 June 2013 17:40, stephen.masters <stephen.masters(a)me.com
> <mailto:stephen.masters@me.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi folks,
>
> Is there a decent way to set a value in the LHS of a rule so that
> it's available in the RHS?
>
> Reason being I have a DSL driving the guided rules editor which
> will pluck out the value of a field, where the name of that field
> is driven by a drop down menu enumeration.
>
> A change I now have would be a lot easier if I could assign a
> string to a variable in the LHS, which could be read by the RHS.
> Otherwise I might need to extend the RHS DSLs to include the same
> enumeration as the LHS. Which looks a bit redundant for a
> business user wondering why the need to write the same thing twice.
>
> Any thoughts?
>
> Steve
>
>
>
>
> Sent from Samsung Mobile
>
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:rules-users@lists.jboss.org>
>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>
>
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users