On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 8:58 AM, djb <dbrownell83@hotmail.com> wrote:

Hi,

I just asked a question about conditionally negating conditions, in the
DRL... and this question is similar, since it comes down to the lack of a
ternary operator.

I have rules where "LINK_OPERATOR" is either representative of >, == or <.
I am using a rule template, and the problem is that it's not the parameters
that change, but the conditions themselves that change based on this
LINK_OPERATOR.

If I call a function, then my chances for the RETE constant time evaluation
is shot.

Since this is a very fundamental part of the rules, must I again split my
rule template into 3 parts? Then with the negation option, I'll need to
double that to 6 templates? And if I have more operators, I'll have to
multiply that in too?

So, if speed is important, should I split the template?

Regards,
Daniel

--
View this message in context: http://n3.nabble.com/Similar-question-changing-operator-from-to-tp212583p212583.html
Sent from the Drools - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users