Re: [rules-users] Re: You must see this, guys...new bug? defining rules saturday night made me mad?

I think I got the point.... This is the rule (table generated) which sets the "upronto" field. *(It should have been fired in a previous ruleflow-node)* *package com.rules.ConsolidateData;* *#generated from Decision Table* *import com.engine.wrappers.ContractWrapper;* *import com.engine.enums.Pronto;* *#From row number: 13* *rule "Pronto_13"* *(RULEFLOW GROUP IS MISSING!!!!!)* ** *when* *cw: ContractWrapper(mycontract.serviceDetail.pronto == "Y", mycontract.serviceDetail.pronto == "Y")* *then* *cw.setUpronto(Pronto.Y);* *System.out.println("PS1"+cw.getMycontract().getId());* *end* I think I DEFINED "THE RULEFLOW-GROUP" IN THE WRONG WAY in the .xls table!!! *So, I think... the **Pronto_13 **rule has been fired after the ScorePronto rule.* I tell you how I defined it.... In the same column where I have "Ruleset", "Import" and "Variables" I put "RULEFLOW-GROUP" as well...it is as follows: |Ruleset | ... | |Import | ...import ... ContractWrapper...| |Variables | ... | |RULEFLOW-GROUP | Scoring | <--- HERE! Is it correct? I thought this is what was meant in http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/JBRULES-1077 In case this were not the problem I really would not know what to do.... now I go to sleep... here in rome is quite late! I hope tomorrow to work it out. Thank You for your Help Edson! Buona notte. Massi "Edson Tirelli" <tirelli(a)post.com&gt; ha scritto nel messaggio news:e6dd5ba30802161533m1d6e035cq9e12dd1b148fa71@mail.gmail.com... 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&gt;: > > > 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 ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ 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