Re: [rules-users] What's wrong with this rule

A player may have multiple characters and the rule should fire when any of its characters live longer than 2 minutes. that's why "characters" do not have a unique identification and there isn't any event representing a character birth. Best Regards, Kevin Zhao 2010/10/28 Wolfgang Laun <wolfgang.laun(a)gmail.com&gt; > If EventB( index == 3 ) signifies that the "character" owned by player 3 > has been killed: what is the event that this character has been born? Life > is the time between birth and death; these two are well-defined (well, > mostly) events, and they ought to be represented by clean-cut events in any > application. Then it's no problem to write rules firing when a "character" > lives longer or shorter than any time. Also, "characters" may have to have a > unique identification beyond their player-owner. > > If you are constantly shifting your specs, we won't be getting any closer > to a solution, though. > > > -W > > > 2010/10/28 赵侃侃 <kevin223(a)gmail.com&gt; > >> To be honest, I don't quite understand the rules you wrote. Let me >> explain this a little bit with a real world scenario. >> Assume this is an on-line game that EventB indicates a 'kill' event that >> a player is losing its character who might be killed by some other player. >> The property index points to the player who owns this character. What I'm >> looking for here is to find out when a player's character survives in 2 >> minutes. The number of players in a game is at least 2 but can be up to any >> number. >> >> Best Regards, >> Kevin Zhao >> >> 2010/10/28 Wolfgang Laun <wolfgang.laun(a)gmail.com&gt; >> >>> >>> >>> 2010/10/28 赵侃侃 <kevin223(a)gmail.com&gt; >>> >>>> Hello Wolfgang, >>>> >>>> Index is just like the index in an array. the value can be any from 0 >>>> to the array length. >>>> for the previous example, the length is 1 so index can be either 0 or >>>> 1. but in the real case, the length can be an arbitrary number. >>>> >>>> another question, there are 2 rules here, do both of them have to be >>>> applied? >>>> >>> >>> One creates and inserts the PatternConsumer which blocks repeated usage >>> of the pair of EventB facts that have been successfully paired. Otherwise a >>> sequence EventB:0, EventB:1, EventB:2 would fire 2 times. >>> >>> If the positive condition is more complex, e.g., you need *all* index >>> values 0,...,L-1 within 2m, then other conditions will be required (and >>> that's what I meant with "more precisesly"). If any pair a,b from [0..L-1] >>> will do, then the modified version (!=) should be OK. >>> >>> -W >>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>> Best Regards, >>>> Kevin Zhao >>>> >>>> 2010/10/28 Wolfgang Laun <wolfgang.laun(a)gmail.com&gt; >>>> >>>> Kindly state your requirements precisely. >>>>> >>>>> Perhaps >>>>> not ( EventB ( index != $index,... ) >>>>> is what you need. >>>>> -W >>>>> >>>>> 2010/10/28 赵侃侃 <kevin223(a)gmail.com&gt; >>>>> >>>>> I haven't tested this rule, but what about the case that property >>>>>> index would have arbitrary number of possible values? >>>>>> >>>>>> 2010/10/27 Wolfgang Laun <wolfgang.laun(a)gmail.com&gt; >>>>>> >>>>>>> Omitting the Entry Points: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> rule "B-0-1-not OK" >>>>>>> when >>>>>>> $b : EventB( $index: index ) >>>>>>> not ( PatternConsumer( id == "B01", events contains $b ) ) >>>>>>> not ( EventB( index == (1 - $index), this after[0s,2m] $b ) ) >>>>>>> then >>>>>>> System.out.println( "B:" + $index + ", but no B:" + (1-$index) ); >>>>>>> end >>>>>>> >>>>>>> rule "B-0-1" >>>>>>> when >>>>>>> $b1 : EventB( $index: index ) >>>>>>> $b2 : EventB( index == (1 - $index), this after[0s,2m] $b1 ) >>>>>>> then >>>>>>> insert( new PatternConsumer( "B01", $b1, $b2 ) ); >>>>>>> System.out.println( "B:" + $index + "+B:" + (1-$index) ); >>>>>>> end >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -W >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 2010/10/27 赵侃侃 <kevin223(a)gmail.com&gt;: >>>>>>> > Hello, >>>>>>> > With the help from the community I managed to get my first rule >>>>>>> working, and >>>>>>> > I'm trying to write my second rule on my own but it just doesn't >>>>>>> seem to >>>>>>> > work correctly. >>>>>>> > Here is the scenario, what I want is to identify a pattern that >>>>>>> there's no >>>>>>> > EventB coming in within 2 minutes with a particular index value. >>>>>>> > For example, EventB would have a property named index and assume >>>>>>> the value >>>>>>> > of index would be either 0 or 1. >>>>>>> > Before firing the rules, I would manually insert facts of >>>>>>> possibleIndex with >>>>>>> > value 0 and 1 into the workingMemory. >>>>>>> > Within 2 minutes, if there only comes one EventB with index valued >>>>>>> 0 then >>>>>>> > the system should report no EventB coming in with index value 1 in >>>>>>> last 2 >>>>>>> > minutes. >>>>>>> > Vice versa, in the case of only coming one EventB with index >>>>>>> valued 1 then >>>>>>> > the system should report no EventB coming in with index value 0 in >>>>>>> last 2 >>>>>>> > minutes. >>>>>>> > If within 2 minutes, there comes 2 EventB with both value 0 and 1 >>>>>>> then >>>>>>> > nothing should report. >>>>>>> > Here is what I wrote, but it doesn't seem to work correctly. >>>>>>> > I used a timer to fire this rule every 10 seconds because I don't >>>>>>> think the >>>>>>> > rule would run automatically if I don't add that. (not too sure >>>>>>> though) >>>>>>> > rule "no B in 2 minutes" >>>>>>> > timer (0 10s) >>>>>>> > when >>>>>>> > possibleIndex( $index : index ) from entry-point "Event stream" >>>>>>> > $p : PatternConsumer ( name == 'no B' && index == $index ) >>>>>>> > not ( EventB( index == $index && this after[0ms,2m] $p) over >>>>>>> window:time(2m) >>>>>>> > from entry-point "Event stream" ) >>>>>>> > then >>>>>>> > PatternConsumer pc = new PatternConsumer( "no B", $index ); >>>>>>> > insert(pc); >>>>>>> > System.out.println("no B in 2 minutes " + $index); >>>>>>> > end >>>>>>> > Best Regards, >>>>>>> > Kevin Zhao >>>>>>> > _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> > rules-users mailing list >>>>>>> > rules-users(a)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 >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> rules-users mailing list >>>>>> rules-users(a)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 >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> rules-users mailing list >>>> rules-users(a)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 >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> rules-users mailing list >> rules-users(a)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 > >