2:05 p.m.
Hello,
I have a fact called 'Option' :
public class Option {
private String code;
private Item item;
public String getCode() {
return code;
}
public void setCode(String optionCode) {
this.code = optionCode;
}
At any point in time, the working memory can have several Option instances
with different code values. My rules need to fire specifically when the
working memory contains a specific set of options. e.g. Rule 1 should fire
if and only if the working memory contains 2 option instances one with code
"P1" and the other with "P2" (order should not matter).
I tried to use 'forall' as follows :
rule "Matched Options"
when
forall (
Option ( code == "P1" || code == "P2" )
)
then
//insert( new IsPriced( i ) );
System.out.println ( "Priced using G/S ");
end
However, the rule above never fires. Maybe I should be taking a different
approach. I'm still learning through how to create rules. So any
help/suggestions on how to tackle the above will be appreciated.
Thanks
Gurvinder
--
View this message in context:
http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/How-to-write-a-rule-t...
Sent from the Drools - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
2:33 p.m.
Hello,
Maybe could you try the following rule?
rule "Matched Options"
when
$o : Option (code == "P1")
Option (this != $o, code == "P2")
then
System.out.println ( "Priced using G/S ");
end
Best regards,
Bruno.
groovenarula a écrit :
Hello,
I have a fact called 'Option' :
public class Option {
private String code;
private Item item;
public String getCode() {
return code;
}
public void setCode(String optionCode) {
this.code = optionCode;
}
At any point in time, the working memory can have several Option instances
with different code values. My rules need to fire specifically when the
working memory contains a specific set of options. e.g. Rule 1 should fire
if and only if the working memory contains 2 option instances one with code
"P1" and the other with "P2" (order should not matter).
I tried to use 'forall' as follows :
rule "Matched Options"
when
forall (
Option ( code == "P1" || code == "P2" )
)
then
//insert( new IsPriced( i ) );
System.out.println ( "Priced using G/S ");
end
However, the rule above never fires. Maybe I should be taking a different
approach. I'm still learning through how to create rules. So any
help/suggestions on how to tackle the above will be appreciated.
Thanks
Gurvinder
3:41 p.m.
I understand this so that there must be *exactly* 2 Option facts, and therefore:
$o1: Option (code == "P1")
$o2: Option (code == "P2")
not Option( this != $o1, this != $o2 )
On 20 January 2011 14:33, Bruno Freudensprung
<bruno.freudensprung(a)temis.com> wrote:
Hello,
Maybe could you try the following rule?
rule "Matched Options"
when
$o : Option (code == "P1")
Option (this != $o, code == "P2")
then
System.out.println ( "Priced using G/S ");
end
Best regards,
Bruno.
groovenarula a écrit :
> Hello,
>
> I have a fact called 'Option' :
>
> public class Option {
> private String code;
>
> private Item item;
> public String getCode() {
> return code;
> }
> public void setCode(String optionCode) {
> this.code = optionCode;
> }
>
> At any point in time, the working memory can have several Option instances
> with different code values. My rules need to fire specifically when the
> working memory contains a specific set of options. e.g. Rule 1 should fire
> if and only if the working memory contains 2 option instances one with code
> "P1" and the other with "P2" (order should not matter).
>
> I tried to use 'forall' as follows :
>
> rule "Matched Options"
> when
> forall (
> Option ( code == "P1" || code == "P2" )
> )
> then
> //insert( new IsPriced( i ) );
> System.out.println ( "Priced using G/S ");
> end
>
> However, the rule above never fires. Maybe I should be taking a different
> approach. I'm still learning through how to create rules. So any
> help/suggestions on how to tackle the above will be appreciated.
>
> Thanks
> Gurvinder
>
>
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
10:09 a.m.
Thanks for the options, Bruno and Wolfgang.
But is there a more 'generic' way to do the matches ? The problem I have is
that the # of instances that might match could vary. And I have to provide a
means for the business users to be able to provide that 'option's code'
using a decision table. Basically I need to be able to provide a construct
that's would look something like :
Options
"P1,P2"
"P1,P4,P5"
So in the above decision table had 2 rules where in the first row represents
a rule that matches against Options with Codes P1 and P2. And the second
rule would match against options with codes P1, P4 and P5.
Is it possible to represent this using Drools decision tables ?
Thanks
Gurvinder
--
View this message in context:
http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/How-to-write-a-rule-t...
Sent from the Drools - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
10:02 a.m.
Hi Gurvinder,
I've just taken a look at chapter 5.1 of Drools Expert about decision
tables but I've been unable to find out how to do that.
If you find a solution, could you please post it here? I'm pretty sure I
will need that as well ;-).
Best regards,
Bruno.
groovenarula a écrit :
Thanks for the options, Bruno and Wolfgang.
But is there a more 'generic' way to do the matches ? The problem I have is
that the # of instances that might match could vary. And I have to provide a
means for the business users to be able to provide that 'option's code'
using a decision table. Basically I need to be able to provide a construct
that's would look something like :
Options
"P1,P2"
"P1,P4,P5"
So in the above decision table had 2 rules where in the first row represents
a rule that matches against Options with Codes P1 and P2. And the second
rule would match against options with codes P1, P4 and P5.
Is it possible to represent this using Drools decision tables ?
Thanks
Gurvinder
10:48 a.m.
Hi,
I finally noticed a "forall" keyword that might be useful (see section
"5.1.4.1. Syntax of templates").
Maybe can you try something like:
[forall(&&){Option(code == $)}]
Bruno.
Bruno Freudensprung a écrit :
Hi Gurvinder,
I've just taken a look at chapter 5.1 of Drools Expert about decision
tables but I've been unable to find out how to do that.
If you find a solution, could you please post it here? I'm pretty sure I
will need that as well ;-).
Best regards,
Bruno.
groovenarula a écrit :
> Thanks for the options, Bruno and Wolfgang.
>
> But is there a more 'generic' way to do the matches ? The problem I have is
> that the # of instances that might match could vary. And I have to provide a
> means for the business users to be able to provide that 'option's code'
> using a decision table. Basically I need to be able to provide a construct
> that's would look something like :
>
> Options
> "P1,P2"
> "P1,P4,P5"
>
> So in the above decision table had 2 rules where in the first row represents
> a rule that matches against Options with Codes P1 and P2. And the second
> rule would match against options with codes P1, P4 and P5.
>
> Is it possible to represent this using Drools decision tables ?
>
> Thanks
> Gurvinder
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
11:10 a.m.
2011/1/27 Bruno Freudensprung <bruno.freudensprung(a)temis.com>
Hi,
I finally noticed a "forall" keyword that might be useful (see section
"5.1.4.1. Syntax of templates").
Maybe can you try something like:
[forall(&&){Option(code == $)}]
This must be written as
forall(){Option(code == "$")}
so that
P1,P2,P3
yields
Option(code == "P1") Option(code == "P2") Option(code ==
"P3")
But there's no way to produce the various binding variables that are
required for writing the "not" CE, as in
$o1: Option(code == "P1") $o2: Option(code == "P2") $o3:
Option(code == "P3")
not Option( this != $o1, this != $o2, this != $o3 )
And even if there were, this would require two columns, which is clumsy.
accumulate with a special function is the best approach.
-W
Bruno.
Bruno Freudensprung a écrit :
Hi Gurvinder,
I've just taken a look at chapter 5.1 of Drools Expert about decision
tables but I've been unable to find out how to do that.
If you find a solution, could you please post it here? I'm pretty sure I
will need that as well ;-).
Best regards,
Bruno.
groovenarula a écrit :
Thanks for the options, Bruno and Wolfgang.
But is there a more 'generic' way to do the matches ? The problem I have is
that the # of instances that might match could vary. And I have to provide a
means for the business users to be able to provide that 'option's code'
using a decision table. Basically I need to be able to provide a construct
that's would look something like :
Options
"P1,P2"
"P1,P4,P5"
So in the above decision table had 2 rules where in the first row represents
a rule that matches against Options with Codes P1 and P2. And the second
rule would match against options with codes P1, P4 and P5.
Is it possible to represent this using Drools decision tables ?
Thanks
Gurvinder
_______________________________________________
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
3:37 p.m.
Given that your restriction is "this 'options' and only them, at least
one instance of each", and you need that in a "generic way", best is for
you
to create your own accumulate function. For Drools 5.1.1 your template would
look like:
$options : List() from accumulate(
$op : Option(),
matchAll( [ ${param}, $op ] ) )
Where ${param} is the list of options the user type in the decision table
cell and matchAll is your own accumulate function with the semantics you
described.
Edson
2011/1/21 groovenarula <gnarula1(a)la-z-boy.com>
Thanks for the options, Bruno and Wolfgang.
But is there a more 'generic' way to do the matches ? The problem I have is
that the # of instances that might match could vary. And I have to provide
a
means for the business users to be able to provide that 'option's code'
using a decision table. Basically I need to be able to provide a construct
that's would look something like :
Options
"P1,P2"
"P1,P4,P5"
So in the above decision table had 2 rules where in the first row
represents
a rule that matches against Options with Codes P1 and P2. And the second
rule would match against options with codes P1, P4 and P5.
Is it possible to represent this using Drools decision tables ?
Thanks
Gurvinder
--
View this message in context:
http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/How-to-write-a-rule-t...
Sent from the Drools - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
--
Edson Tirelli
JBoss Drools Core Development
JBoss by Red Hat @ www.jboss.com
4:50 p.m.
Thanks for outlining the approach, Edson.
Unfortunately, I'm a newbie using drools, so I just need some clarification
on what you mean by 'matchAll is your own accumulate function with the
semantics you described.' ? Do you mean that I have to create a 'custom'
accumulate function ?
Edson, if that's the case, then I'll try to search for example of creating a
custom function. When I last searched, I did find an example on the
Internet, however, I don't think I found details of how to make the function
available to the rules engine (is it as simple as including the jar in the
classpath or do I need to take addtional steps to use Matchall in drl ?)
Can you please elaborate for the benefit of a noobie ?
Thanks
Gurvinder
--
View this message in context:
http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/How-to-write-a-rule-t...
Sent from the Drools - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
8:36 p.m.
Accumulate functions are very well documented in the Expert manual. Look for
a section titled "Accumulate Functions".
You could also use accumulate with all the steps in inline code, which is
documented in the preceding section.
-W
On 26 January 2011 16:50, groovenarula <gnarula1(a)la-z-boy.com> wrote:
Thanks for outlining the approach, Edson.
Unfortunately, I'm a newbie using drools, so I just need some clarification
on what you mean by 'matchAll is your own accumulate function with the
semantics you described.' ? Do you mean that I have to create a 'custom'
accumulate function ?
Edson, if that's the case, then I'll try to search for example of creating
a
custom function. When I last searched, I did find an example on the
Internet, however, I don't think I found details of how to make the
function
available to the rules engine (is it as simple as including the jar in the
classpath or do I need to take addtional steps to use Matchall in drl ?)
Can you please elaborate for the benefit of a noobie ?
Thanks
Gurvinder
--
View this message in context:
http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/How-to-write-a-rule-t...
Sent from the Drools - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
2:51 a.m.
Thanks Wolfgang. I found it. I Work on it and let you'll know how it goes.
Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 27, 2011, at 1:08 AM, "Wolfgang Laun-2 [via Drools - Java Rules Engine]"
<ml-node+2356705-1292265879-9505(a)n3.nabble.com> wrote:
Accumulate functions are very well documented in the Expert manual.
Look for a section titled "Accumulate Functions".
You could also use accumulate with all the steps in inline code, which is documented in
the preceding section.
-W
On 26 January 2011 16:50, groovenarula <[hidden email]> wrote:
Thanks for outlining the approach, Edson.
Unfortunately, I'm a newbie using drools, so I just need some clarification
on what you mean by 'matchAll is your own accumulate function with the
semantics you described.' ? Do you mean that I have to create a 'custom'
accumulate function ?
Edson, if that's the case, then I'll try to search for example of creating a
custom function. When I last searched, I did find an example on the
Internet, however, I don't think I found details of how to make the function
available to the rules engine (is it as simple as including the jar in the
classpath or do I need to take addtional steps to use Matchall in drl ?)
Can you please elaborate for the benefit of a noobie ?
Thanks
Gurvinder
--
View this message in context:
http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/How-to-write-a-rule-t...
Sent from the Drools - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:
http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/How-to-write-a-rule-t...
To unsubscribe from How to write a rule that fires when it matches against specific facts
in working memory., click here.
--
View this message in context:
http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/How-to-write-a-rule-t...
Sent from the Drools - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
5:42 a.m.
I suggest you use this as a base for your implementation, as I think it
will help you:
https://github.com/droolsjbpm/droolsjbpm/blob/master/drools-core/src/main...
<https://github.com/droolsjbpm/droolsjbpm/blob/master/drools-core/src/main...
Edson
2011/1/26 groovenarula <gnarula1(a)la-z-boy.com>
Thanks Wolfgang. I found it. I Work on it and let you'll know how
it goes.
Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 27, 2011, at 1:08 AM, "Wolfgang Laun-2 [via Drools - Java Rules
Engine]" <[hidden
email]<http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=2359225&i=0>>
wrote:
Accumulate functions are very well documented in the Expert manual. Look
for a section titled "Accumulate Functions".
You could also use accumulate with all the steps in inline code, which is
documented in the preceding section.
-W
On 26 January 2011 16:50, groovenarula <[hidden
email]<http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=2356705&i=0&by-user=t>
> wrote:
>
> Thanks for outlining the approach, Edson.
>
> Unfortunately, I'm a newbie using drools, so I just need some
> clarification
> on what you mean by 'matchAll is your own accumulate function with the
> semantics you described.' ? Do you mean that I have to create a 'custom'
> accumulate function ?
>
> Edson, if that's the case, then I'll try to search for example of creating
> a
> custom function. When I last searched, I did find an example on the
> Internet, however, I don't think I found details of how to make the
> function
> available to the rules engine (is it as simple as including the jar in the
> classpath or do I need to take addtional steps to use Matchall in drl ?)
>
> Can you please elaborate for the benefit of a noobie ?
>
> Thanks
> Gurvinder
>
> --
> View this message in context:
>
<http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/How-to-write-a-rule-t...
>
http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/How-to-write-a-rule-t...
> Sent from the Drools - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> [hidden
email]<http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=2356705&i=1&by-user=t>
>
> <https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users>
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
[hidden
email]<http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=2356705&i=2&by-user=t>
<https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
------------------------------
If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion
below:
<http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/How-to-write-a-rule-t...
http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/How-to-write-a-rule-t...
To unsubscribe from How to write a rule that fires when it matches against
specific facts in working memory., click
here<http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/template/Naml...;.
------------------------------
View this message in context: Re: How to write a rule that fires when it
matches against specific facts in working
memory.<http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/How-to-wri...
Sent from the Drools - User mailing list
archive<http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/Drools-Use...
Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
--
Edson Tirelli
JBoss Drools Core Development
JBoss by Red Hat @ www.jboss.com
5:59 a.m.
Edson,
This surely looks like a great template to base my implementation - it looks like an great
starting point.
Gurvinder
-----Original Message-----
From: Edson Tirelli-4 [via Drools - Java Rules Engine]
[mailto:ml-node+2359987-1512063982-9505@n3.nabble.com]
Sent: Wed 1/26/2011 11:44 PM
To: Gurvinder Narula1
Subject: Re: How to write a rule that fires when it matches against specific facts in
working memory.
  I suggest you use this as a base for your implementation, as I think it will help
you:
https://github.com/droolsjbpm/droolsjbpm/blob/master/drools-core/src/main...
<https://github.com/droolsjbpm/droolsjbpm/blob/master/drools-core/src/main...
  Edson
2011/1/26 groovenarula <[hidden email]>
Thanks Wolfgang. I found it. I Work on it and let you'll know how it goes.
Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 27, 2011, at 1:08 AM, "Wolfgang Laun-2 [via Drools - Java Rules Engine]"
<[hidden email] <http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=2359225&i=0>
> wrote:
Accumulate functions are very well documented in the Expert manual. Look for a section
titled "Accumulate Functions".
You could also use accumulate with all the steps in inline code, which is documented in
the preceding section.
-W
On 26 January 2011 16:50, groovenarula <[hidden email]
<http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=2356705&i=0&by-user=... >
wrote:
Thanks for outlining the approach, Edson.
Unfortunately, I'm a newbie using drools, so I just need some clarification
on what you mean by 'matchAll is your own accumulate function with the
semantics you described.' ? Do you mean that I have to create a 'custom'
accumulate function ?
Edson, if that's the case, then I'll try to search for example of creating a
custom function. When I last searched, I did find an example on the
Internet, however, I don't think I found details of how to make the function
available to the rules engine (is it as simple as including the jar in the
classpath or do I need to take addtional steps to use Matchall in drl ?)
Can you please elaborate for the benefit of a noobie ?
Thanks
Gurvinder
--
View this message in context:
<http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/How-to-write-a-rule-t...
http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/How-to-write-a-rule-t...
<http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/How-to-write-a-rule-t...
Sent from the Drools - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
[hidden email]
<http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=2356705&i=1&by-user=...
<https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
[hidden email]
<http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=2356705&i=2&by-user=...
<https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
________________________________
If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:
<http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/How-to-write-a-rule-t...
http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/How-to-write-a-rule-t...
<http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/How-to-write-a-rule-t...
________________________________
View this message in context: Re: How to write a rule that fires when it matches against
specific facts in working memory.
<http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/How-to-write-a-rule-t...
Sent from the Drools - User mailing list archive
<http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/Drools-User-f47000.ht...
at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
--
 Edson Tirelli
 JBoss Drools Core Development
 JBoss by Red Hat @ www.jboss.com
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
________________________________
If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:
http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/How-to-write-a-rule-t...
To unsubscribe from How to write a rule that fires when it matches against specific facts
in working memory., click here
<http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet....
.
--
View this message in context:
http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/How-to-write-a-rule-t...
Sent from the Drools - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
3:22 p.m.
Edson,
I did manage to use the 'CollectSetAccumulateFunction' as a template for the
MatchAll and have also successfully 'called' the accumulate function from a
rule written in a .drl file. But I'm stuck at one point - how to send the
value of $param to the accumulate method ? From what I understand, the
accumulate method is invoked for each fact - so if I write
MatchAll( $o ) it will invoke the accumulate method and passing $o fact
to the method via the 'Object value' parameter.
So far so go, however, I'm stuck on how to pass the value of '$param' to the
accumulate method (or any other method like init, getResult for that
matter).
One option I can think of is to change the definition of the Option fact to
include a 'param' field and then write a rule that sets the value of that
field to $param (so every Options param field would get set to the value of
$param). I can then extract that in the accumulate method it self. But is
there a better way that I might be missing ?
Thanks in advance,
Gurvinder
--
View this message in context:
http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/How-to-write-a-rule-t...
Sent from the Drools - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
4:01 p.m.
Up to Drools 5, the accumulate function API supports only a single
argument to the function, but that argument can be an array or a list. So
what I do on my own implementations is to pass the $param as one element of
the array and $o as the other. It is not ideal, but it is how you can do
that in Drools 5. In Drools 6 I will change the API to support multiple
parameters, but I've been postponing that because when I do it, it will
break existing implementations of the interface.
Anyway, if you are using the MVEL dialect, creating a list is as simple
as wrapping it in [ ], as you could see in my previous e-mail.
$options : List() from accumulate(
$op : Option(),
matchAll( [ ${param}, $op ] ) )
Edson
2011/1/29 groovenarula <gnarula1(a)la-z-boy.com>
Edson,
I did manage to use the 'CollectSetAccumulateFunction' as a template for
the
MatchAll and have also successfully 'called' the accumulate function from a
rule written in a .drl file. But I'm stuck at one point - how to send the
value of $param to the accumulate method ? From what I understand, the
accumulate method is invoked for each fact - so if I write
MatchAll( $o ) it will invoke the accumulate method and passing $o fact
to the method via the 'Object value' parameter.
So far so go, however, I'm stuck on how to pass the value of '$param' to
the
accumulate method (or any other method like init, getResult for that
matter).
One option I can think of is to change the definition of the Option fact to
include a 'param' field and then write a rule that sets the value of that
field to $param (so every Options param field would get set to the value of
$param). I can then extract that in the accumulate method it self. But is
there a better way that I might be missing ?
Thanks in advance,
Gurvinder
--
View this message in context:
http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/How-to-write-a-rule-t...
Sent from the Drools - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
--
Edson Tirelli
JBoss Drools Core Development
JBoss by Red Hat @ www.jboss.com
5:32 a.m.
Edson,
That worked beautifully !
Drools is looking more and more promising for what we need to do.
Thanks for all your help,
Gurvinder
-----Original Message-----
From: Edson Tirelli-4 [via Drools - Java Rules Engine]
[mailto:ml-node+2380361-572428564-9505@n3.nabble.com]
Sent: Sat 1/29/2011 10:59 PM
To: Gurvinder Narula1
Subject: Re: How to write a rule that fires when it matches against specific facts in
working memory.
  Up to Drools 5, the accumulate function API supports only a single argument to the
function, but that argument can be an array or a list. So what I do on my own
implementations is to pass the $param as one element of the array and $o as the other. It
is not ideal, but it is how you can do that in Drools 5. In Drools 6 I will change the API
to support multiple parameters, but I've been postponing that because when I do it, it
will break existing implementations of the interface.
  Anyway, if you are using the MVEL dialect, creating a list is as simple as wrapping
it in [ ], as you could see in my previous e-mail.
$options : List() from accumulate(Â
    $op : Option(),
    matchAll( [ ${param}, $op ] ) )
   Edson
2011/1/29 groovenarula <[hidden email]>
Edson,
I did manage to use the 'CollectSetAccumulateFunction' as a template for the
MatchAll and have also successfully 'called' the accumulate function from a
rule written in a .drl file. But I'm stuck at one point - how to send the
value of $param to the accumulate method ? From what I understand, the
accumulate method is invoked for each fact - so if I write
  MatchAll( $o ) it will invoke the accumulate method and passing $o fact
to the method via the 'Object value' parameter.
So far so go, however, I'm stuck on how to pass the value of '$param' to the
accumulate method (or any other method like init, getResult for that
matter).
One option I can think of is to change the definition of the Option fact to
include a 'param' field and then write a rule that sets the value of that
field to $param (so every Options param field would get set to the value of
$param). I can then extract that in the accumulate method it self. But is
there a better way that I might be missing ?
Thanks in advance,
Gurvinder
--
View this message in context:
http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/How-to-write-a-rule-t...
<http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/How-to-write-a-rule-t...
Sent from the Drools - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
--
 Edson Tirelli
 JBoss Drools Core Development
 JBoss by Red Hat @ www.jboss.com
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
________________________________
If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:
http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/How-to-write-a-rule-t...
To unsubscribe from How to write a rule that fires when it matches against specific facts
in working memory., click here
<http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet....
.
--
View this message in context:
http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/How-to-write-a-rule-t...
Sent from the Drools - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
6:12 p.m.
Edson/Wolfgang,
Thanks to your suggestions, I've got this working the way I need it using
rules defined in a .drl file. I think I have just one hurdle left before I
start working out how to get it working through decision tables - and that
is how to specific 'mvel' dialect for decision tables.
Edson as you pointed out, in order for me to send the value of $param to the
accumulator, I should use mvel to create a list of the parameters (the
$param and the fact being matched). I tried looking for ways to specify mvel
and couldn't find how to set the dialect for rules defined in decision
tables.
Thanks,
Gurvinder
--
View this message in context:
http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/How-to-write-a-rule-t...
Sent from the Drools - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
11 p.m.
Unfortunately "dialect" is not supported in Excel based Decision Tables (and
the guided Decision Table in Guvnor is not currently sophisticated enough to
support your requirement).
Feel free to look into the code
(org.drools.decisiontable.parser.DefaultRuleSheetListener is a good starting
point in drools-decisiontables) if you're interested...
...or raise a JIRA for this to be added.
With kind regards,
Mike
On 5 February 2011 17:12, groovenarula <gnarula1(a)la-z-boy.com> wrote:
Edson/Wolfgang,
Thanks to your suggestions, I've got this working the way I need it using
rules defined in a .drl file. I think I have just one hurdle left before I
start working out how to get it working through decision tables - and that
is how to specific 'mvel' dialect for decision tables.
Edson as you pointed out, in order for me to send the value of $param to
the
accumulator, I should use mvel to create a list of the parameters (the
$param and the fact being matched). I tried looking for ways to specify
mvel
and couldn't find how to set the dialect for rules defined in decision
tables.
Thanks,
Gurvinder
--
View this message in context:
http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/How-to-write-a-rule-t...
Sent from the Drools - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
8:40 a.m.
I haven't tried this, but it ought to work: put
dialect "mvel";
into the cell next to the cell keyed Functions, with or without actual
function. Code
in there is just copied.
But, apart from some simpler coding in the code snippets, using MVEL is not
a "must have".
-W
On 5 February 2011 18:12, groovenarula <gnarula1(a)la-z-boy.com> wrote:
Edson/Wolfgang,
Thanks to your suggestions, I've got this working the way I need it using
rules defined in a .drl file. I think I have just one hurdle left before I
start working out how to get it working through decision tables - and that
is how to specific 'mvel' dialect for decision tables.
Edson as you pointed out, in order for me to send the value of $param to
the
accumulator, I should use mvel to create a list of the parameters (the
$param and the fact being matched). I tried looking for ways to specify
mvel
and couldn't find how to set the dialect for rules defined in decision
tables.
Thanks,
Gurvinder
--
View this message in context:
http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/How-to-write-a-rule-t...
Sent from the Drools - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
11:07 p.m.
Wolfgang - adding the dialect to the 'Functions' cell worked like a charm.
Edson's solution did not work without the dialect mvel. So in this case MVEL
is a must have. But then your suggestion to add the dialect next to the
cell keyed Functions worked.
Thanks again for your help.
--
View this message in context:
http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/How-to-write-a-rule-t...
Sent from the Drools - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
4818
days inactive
4838
days old
19 comments
5 participants
participants (5)
-
Bruno Freudensprung -
Edson Tirelli -
groovenarula -
Michael Anstis -
Wolfgang Laun