Hi Edson, thanks for the update. Any specific reason why this is so? Because as a general convention in Java, we tend to use global declarations in any constructs across. It would be a good thing to have.

 

 

 

On 7/2/07, Edson Tirelli <tirelli@post.com> wrote:

   Natraj,

   Globals were not designed to be available in functions, unless they are sent in as parameters in the way you did in your second example.

   []s
   Edson

2007/7/2, Natraj Gudla <natraj.gudla@gmail.com>:

Hello,

 

I am using Drools 3.0.6. While using a global variable in a function, the compiler complains it cannot resolve the global variable name. Something like below

 

global

com.sample.ExampleLogger customLogger;

function

void logMessage(String msg){

customLogger.logMessage("Log Message from the function");

}

In the above code, it complains "customLogger cannot be resolved". I am able to refer the global in the consequence of a rule directly. What is the problem using the reference within a function.

 

On the other hand, i am able to do something like

 

function void logMessage(ExampleLogger custLogger,String msg){

custLogger.logMessage(msg+

" Accept gloabal as function parameter");

}

and call from the consequence of a rule : logMessage(customLogger);  // I am passing the global to the function as an argument and then use it to log a message.

This way is working. But not the first way of using the global in the function.

 

Any help??

Thanks
--
Natraj Gudla

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

--
  Edson Tirelli
  Software Engineer - JBoss Rules Core Developer
  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@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users