This is now corrected in MVEL 1.2beta16 which also inlines ASM with a different package name. The MVEL author notes that while the jar conflict stops the ASM optimiser, it'll still work as normal in the fallback reflection mode.

Mark
brad hadfield wrote:
Sure -- here's the stack trace...
 
 org.objectweb.asm.ClassWriter.<init>(I)V
 at org.mvel.optimizers.impl.asm.ASMAccessorOptimizer.<init>(ASMAccessorOptimizer.java:88)
 at org.mvel.optimizers.OptimizerFactory.<clinit>(OptimizerFactory.java:46)
 at org.mvel.Token.getReducedValueAccelerated(Token.java:302)
 at org.mvel.ExecutableAccessor.getValue(ExecutableAccessor.java:46)
 at org.mvel.MVEL.executeExpression(MVEL.java:173)
 at org.drools.base.dataproviders.MVELDataProvider.getResults(MVELDataProvider.java:43)
 at org.drools.reteoo.FromNode.assertTuple(FromNode.java:61)
 at org.drools.reteoo.SingleTupleSinkAdapter.createAndPropagateAssertTuple(SingleTupleSinkAdapter.java:55)
 at org.drools.reteoo.LeftInputAdapterNode.assertObject(LeftInputAdapterNode.java:147)
 at org.drools.reteoo.SingleObjectSinkAdapter.propagateAssertObject(SingleObjectSinkAdapter.java:20)
 at org.drools.reteoo.ObjectTypeNode.assertObject(ObjectTypeNode.java:163)
 at org.drools.reteoo.Rete.assertObject(Rete.java:121)
 at org.drools.reteoo.ReteooRuleBase.assertObject(ReteooRuleBase.java:196)
 at org.drools.reteoo.ReteooWorkingMemory.doAssertObject(ReteooWorkingMemory.java:68)
 at org.drools.common.AbstractWorkingMemory.assertObject(AbstractWorkingMemory.java:724)
 at org.drools.common.AbstractWorkingMemory.assertObject(AbstractWorkingMemory.java:543)
 at test.hxr.TestCompileDrl.testCompileAndExecute(TestCompileDrl.java:91)
 at test.hxr.TestCompileDrl.main(TestCompileDrl.java:40)
[MVEL] Notice: Possible incorrect version of ASM present (3.0 required).  Disabling JIT compiler.  Reflective Optimizer will be used.
This is more of an MVEL question, I guess, but do you know if there is a way to force the use of reflection over ASM?

Thanks, Brad
From: Michael Neale [mailto:michael.neale@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 8:11 PM
To: Rules Users List
Subject: Re: [rules-users] 3.1 M1 "from" keyword

should already be done - mvel may be using the wrong one.

Can you tell me what class it is that gives the nosuchmethod? (ie what the target class is) and we can make sure all references are to inlined one so this won't happen again.

Michael.

On 4/27/07, Mark Proctor <mproctor@codehaus.org> wrote:
For M2 I'll look at changing the namespace for ASM to avoid this issue. Not sure how you'll avoid the issue till then.

Mark
brad hadfield wrote:
Hi, I wonder if anyone could help me?

I'm attempting to use the 'from' keyword in  the same fashion as the sample found on the Release Notes/Language Improvement wiki.  The example shows a piece of syntax that uses the 'from' keyword to obtain data via a Hibernate query. i.e:
 
  $r : Restaurant( $postCode ) from hbSession.getNamedQuery( "some query" ).setProperties( [ key1 : value2, key2 : value ] ).list()

I'm having difficulty executing syntax using this keyword because Hibernate uses CGlib which relies on ASM 1.5.3 - the 'from' keyword seems to rely on MVEL which uses ASM 3.0.
 
ASM 3.0 is not backwards compatible with ASM 1.5.3 and I get 'no such method' errors.
 
So how does one get the 'from' keyword to work in an environment running Hibernate?
 
Thanks,
Brad

_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users@lists.jboss.org

https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users


_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users



_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users