4:33 a.m.
I am trying to understand the usage of "from".
Do I take it that facts that come from a "from" CE do not actually get
asserted into the WM?
I would like to be sure because the facts that I would like to fetch
with "from" are actually the same Java class as one of my WM facts but I
do not want the "from" facts to be treated the same as the ones that are
in WM... I do not want them to fire rules that the "normal" WM facts would.
Chris
6:55 a.m.
On 31 December 2010 11:33, Chris Selwyn <chris(a)selwyn-family.me.uk> wrote:
I am trying to understand the usage of "from".
Do I take it that facts that come from a "from" CE do not actually get
asserted into the WM?
Yes. (They might happen to be WMEs, if you have inserted them.)
-W
I would like to be sure because the facts that I would like to fetch
with "from" are actually the same Java class as one of my WM facts but I
do not want the "from" facts to be treated the same as the ones that are
in WM... I do not want them to fire rules that the "normal" WM facts would.
Chris
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
7:33 a.m.
I assume that you mean that Yes they don't rather than Yes they do :-)
(Isn't english so imprecise?)
(WMEs? Working Memory Entries?)
Chris
On 31/12/2010 12:55, Wolfgang Laun wrote:
On 31 December 2010 11:33, Chris Selwyn <chris(a)selwyn-family.me.uk
<mailto:chris@selwyn-family.me.uk>> wrote:
I am trying to understand the usage of "from".
Do I take it that facts that come from a "from" CE do not actually get
asserted into the WM?
Yes. (They might happen to be WMEs, if you have inserted them.)
-W
I would like to be sure because the facts that I would like to fetch
with "from" are actually the same Java class as one of my WM facts
but I
do not want the "from" facts to be treated the same as the ones
that are
in WM... I do not want them to fire rules that the "normal" WM
facts would.
Chris
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:rules-users@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
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>
Version: 10.0.1191 / Virus Database: 1435/3349 - Release Date: 12/30/10
9:14 a.m.
Hmm, you asked whether "do I take it that...", which I take to mean the same
as "should I assume that...". Hence: yes, you should!
Indirect figures of speech are always suprising if replied to at face value.
Q. "May I ask you how olod you are?"
A. "Yes, you may."
WME = Working Memory Elements.
Cheers
Wolfgang
2010/12/31 Chris Selwyn <chris(a)selwyn-family.me.uk>
I assume that you mean that Yes they don't rather than Yes they do :-)
(Isn't english so imprecise?)
(WMEs? Working Memory Entries?)
Chris
On 31/12/2010 12:55, Wolfgang Laun wrote:
On 31 December 2010 11:33, Chris Selwyn <chris(a)selwyn-family.me.uk> wrote:
> I am trying to understand the usage of "from".
>
> Do I take it that facts that come from a "from" CE do not actually get
> asserted into the WM?
>
Yes. (They might happen to be WMEs, if you have inserted them.)
-W
>
> I would like to be sure because the facts that I would like to fetch
> with "from" are actually the same Java class as one of my WM facts but I
> do not want the "from" facts to be treated the same as the ones that are
> in WM... I do not want them to fire rules that the "normal" WM facts
> would.
>
> Chris
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing
listrules-users@lists.jboss.orghttps://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1191 / Virus Database: 1435/3349 - Release Date: 12/30/10
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
10 a.m.
Thanks for the confirmation :-)
Happy new year.
Chris
On 31/12/2010 15:14, Wolfgang Laun wrote:
Hmm, you asked whether "do I take it that...", which I take
to mean
the same as "should I assume that...". Hence: yes, you should!
Indirect figures of speech are always suprising if replied to at face
value.
Q. "May I ask you how olod you are?"
A. "Yes, you may."
WME = Working Memory Elements.
Cheers
Wolfgang
2010/12/31 Chris Selwyn <chris(a)selwyn-family.me.uk
<mailto:chris@selwyn-family.me.uk>>
I assume that you mean that Yes they don't rather than Yes they do
:-) (Isn't english so imprecise?)
(WMEs? Working Memory Entries?)
Chris
On 31/12/2010 12:55, Wolfgang Laun wrote:
>
>
> On 31 December 2010 11:33, Chris Selwyn
> <chris(a)selwyn-family.me.uk <mailto:chris@selwyn-family.me.uk>>
wrote:
>
> I am trying to understand the usage of "from".
>
> Do I take it that facts that come from a "from" CE do not
> actually get
> asserted into the WM?
>
>
> Yes. (They might happen to be WMEs, if you have inserted them.)
> -W
>
>
> I would like to be sure because the facts that I would like
> to fetch
> with "from" are actually the same Java class as one of my WM
> facts but I
> do not want the "from" facts to be treated the same as the
> ones that are
> in WM... I do not want them to fire rules that the "normal"
> WM facts would.
>
> Chris
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:rules-users@lists.jboss.org>
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:rules-users@lists.jboss.org>
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>
>
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>
> Version: 10.0.1191 / Virus Database: 1435/3349 - Release Date:
> 12/30/10
>
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:rules-users@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
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>
Version: 10.0.1191 / Virus Database: 1435/3349 - Release Date: 12/30/10
5079
days inactive
5079
days old
4 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
Chris Selwyn -
Wolfgang Laun