Hi All, I have "rule1" and "rule2", very simple rules. I would like in "rule3" to check one of the following: "rule1" AND "rule2" (i.e. if both rule1 and rule2 were fired) "rule1" OR "rule2" (rule1 or rule2 was fired) How can I achieve this? Does the "extends" keyword might help here? I achieved that buy defining a list, to which rule1 and rule2 in the RHS inserted some value. In rule3 I checked the values of that list. I would like to ask if there are some prettier solutions. Thanks in advance. Any help would be appreciated. -- View this message in context: http://n3.nabble.com/Checking-in-one-rule-the-result-of-another-rule-tp17... 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

Usually, trying to artificially control or detect the rules execution to use as part of other "business rules" is not a good thing. In my opinion, I think you should step back and give a new look at the problem. What is your requirement? Rules (in forward chaining systems) react to the working memory state, and when the state is detected, they fire new actions that will usually change the state, possibly (re)activating new rules, and so on. My advice to you is to try to rewrite your rules (1, 2, 3 or as many as you need) based on the state of the working memory. There are several reasons for the paradigm to work like that, but just as one example, if in the future you have a new rule X that causes a change of state similar to rules 1 and 2, your rule 3 will continue to work just fine, since it is based on state and not "hard coded" as dependent of other rules. This is obviously a general recommendation. We would need more details about what kind of rules you are trying to model in order to better help you. Edson 2010/1/31 orchid <maya.pollack(a)gmail.com&gt; > Hi All, > I have "rule1" and "rule2", very simple rules. I would like in "rule3" to > check one of the following: > "rule1" AND "rule2" (i.e. if both rule1 and rule2 were fired) > "rule1" OR "rule2" (rule1 or rule2 was fired) > > How can I achieve this? Does the "extends" keyword might help here? > > I achieved that buy defining a list, to which rule1 and rule2 in the RHS > inserted some value. In rule3 I checked the values of that list. I would > like to ask if there are some prettier solutions. > > Thanks in advance. > Any help would be appreciated. > -- > View this message in context: > http://n3.nabble.com/Checking-in-one-rule-the-result-of-another-rule-tp17... > 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 _______________________________________________ rules-users mailing list rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users

-----Original Message----- From: rules-users-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org [mailto:rules-users- bounces(a)lists.jboss.org] On Behalf Of orchid Sent: 01 February 2010 07:13 To: rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org Subject: Re: [rules-users] Checking in one rule the "result" of another rule Wolfgang and Edson, thank you very much for the detailed replies. I understand that logically my wish might be incorrect, but this is a requirement we have. I will try to explain my situation in detailed: 1. The facts are of class Word. The rules check characteristics of words, such as letters distance, number of letter occurrences in a word, etc... 2. I have user rules (Ri), such as: check if in a given word the letter 'a' appears more than twice and the distance between 'a' and 'd' is 2. 3. I have "base" rules (ri) which perform only one checking 4. I would like to build user rules out of base rules. For example: R = r0 AND r1, where r0 = a given word the letter a appears more than twice r1 = in a given word the distance between 'a' and 'd' is 2 I use "rule splitting" in order to get the rule rational, i.e. which parts of the rule caused it to be fired. Sorry for the long post. I hope my need is clearer. Thank you very much for your help !!! -- View this message in context: http://n3.nabble.com/Checking-in-one-rule-the- result-of-another-rule-tp179837p180827.html 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