Re: [rules-users] Does generated graph rules is build to respect a disjunctive normal form ?
I thought clips did do disjunction normal form? in that all ‘or’s are removed from the
body of the tree and moved to the root, thus rewriting the logic into separate rules? This
docs shows an ‘or’ rule is the equivalent of disjunction normal form:
http://www.csie.ntu.edu.tw/~sylee/courses/clips/bpg/node5.4.3.html
We do soothing similar to above, and a few other things. This class applies all our logic
transformations, you may add others:
https://github.com/droolsjbpm/drools/blob/master/drools-core/src/main/jav...
Mark
On 2 Jun 2014, at 14:37, Mercier Jonathan <jmercier(a)genoscope.cns.fr> wrote:
Hi,
We use Drools at this time to explore some possibilities. We have an old
system, clips based and with clips rules need to be wrote to a
disjunctive normal form because they are no internal processing to
transform user rule to a disjunctive normal form.
As Drools generate a graph (Phreak) i would like to know if this graph
try to represent rules as a disjunctive normal form ?
if not i would like to know if we should to use disjunctive normal form
to write rules ?
It seem disjunctive normal form could allow to do some concurrent
computation, i would like to know if drools will use this feature?
thanks
Regards
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users