Need to see the full test case to be able to understand if it is a bug or
not, because the expression in the LHS is using the ShadowProxy, while the
one in the RHS is not... so, it may be a bug or it may not... depends when
and how you are setting the upronto field.
[]s
Edson
2008/2/16, mmquelo(a)gmail.com <mmquelo(a)gmail.com>:
Look at this....
I have got a "ContractWrapper" fact inserted into WM.
It wraps a "Contract" object and some "enums" fields.
One of these fields is "upronto":
*
public
* *class* ContractWrapper *extends* BaseOmPersistentWithAssignedId{
Contract
mycontract=*null*;
...
Pronto upronto = *null*;
*...*
*<getters and setters....>*
...
}
"upronto" is an insance of a "Pronto" java enum:
*
public
* *enum* Pronto {*
N
*,*
UNKNOWN
*,*
Y
*;
}
"Pronto" can be : (Y, N, UNKNOWN)
Here is the rule which reasons over this enum:
(ofcourse I have got a Request into WM as well)
*rule "ScorePronto"
dialect "mvel"
ruleflow-group "Scoring"
when
$r:Request( $mc:mainContract != null )
$cw_p:ContractWrapper($c_w_p:mycontract == $mc, eval(upronto !=
Pronto.Y))*
* then
System.out.println("Test Result: "+($cw_p.upronto == Pronto.Y))
end*
Any guesses for the output???
Well....
*Test Result: true*
HOW COMES???????????????????
I mean ... the test "eval(upronto != Pronto.Y)" returned "true"....
It
means that the rule
engine sees upronto <> Pronto.Y!, doesn't it??!!!!
*So... why do I get "upronto == Pronto.Y" in the RHS????*
What the.........&$%%&()%%$/%£....sorry....but having these
kind of problems during saturday night is not so pleaseant!
T-T
I really hope you can help me with a workaround to this issue.
Bye
Massi
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
--
Edson Tirelli
JBoss Drools Core Development
Office: +55 11 3529-6000
Mobile: +55 11 9287-5646
JBoss, a division of Red Hat @
www.jboss.com