5:12 p.m.
Dear Sirs:
I'm working on an application which writes a set of rules using information
which is stored in BDD tables. This information can be 'wrong' concerning
rule compilation, and I expect that Drools reports the corresponding
compilation errors.
I've found that PatternBuilder.createRestriction() fails to process
composite restrictions when one of the single restrictions cannot be
implemented. The problem is that although one of the sigle restrictions is
returned null, the composite restriction array is succesfully returned, one
of its elements being null, wich causes a NullPointerException when the
composite restriction is processed in
PatternBuilder.build(AbstractCompositeConstraint version) to obtain a
MultiRestrictionFieldConstraint object.
I would like to know if this bug has yet been reported and fixed in some
Drools version beyond 5.1.1
Thank you very much for your time.
Kind regards,
Manuel Ortiz
12:46 a.m.
Now would you mind posting an example reproducing this error...
-W
On 22/12/2011, Manuel Ortiz <manuel.ortizramos(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Sirs:
I'm working on an application which writes a set of rules using information
which is stored in BDD tables. This information can be 'wrong' concerning
rule compilation, and I expect that Drools reports the corresponding
compilation errors.
I've found that PatternBuilder.createRestriction() fails to process
composite restrictions when one of the single restrictions cannot be
implemented. The problem is that although one of the sigle restrictions is
returned null, the composite restriction array is succesfully returned, one
of its elements being null, wich causes a NullPointerException when the
composite restriction is processed in
PatternBuilder.build(AbstractCompositeConstraint version) to obtain a
MultiRestrictionFieldConstraint object.
I would like to know if this bug has yet been reported and fixed in some
Drools version beyond 5.1.1
Thank you very much for your time.
Kind regards,
Manuel Ortiz
3:14 a.m.
Dear Wolfgang:
Just change the "Hello World" rule in the "Hello World" example by
this
one...
rule "Hello World"
when
m : Message( status == Message.HELLO || != "WrongType", myMessage : message
)
then
System.out.println( myMessage );
m.setMessage( "Goodbye cruel world" );
m.setStatus( Message.GOODBYE );
update( m );
end
...and you will get the following building error:
Description Resource Path Location Type
Error: java.lang.NullPointerException Sample.drl /DroolsTest2/src/main/rules
Unknown Drools Error
This NullPointerException breaks the normal drools compiler execution flow.
In contrast, if you use the following "Hello World" rule...
rule "Hello World"
when
m : Message( status != "WrongType", myMessage : message )
then
System.out.println( myMessage );
m.setMessage( "Goodbye cruel world" );
m.setStatus( Message.GOODBYE );
update( m );
end
...then you get the following building errors:
Description Resource Path Location Type
BuildError: Unable to create a Field value of type 'ValueType = 'int''
and
value 'WrongType' Sample.drl /DroolsTest2/src/main/rules Unknown Drools
Error
BuildError: Unable to create restriction '[LiteralRestriction: !=
WrongType]' for field 'status' in the rule 'Hello World' Sample.drl
/DroolsTest2/src/main/rules line 7 Drools Error
which don't break the drools compiler execution flow.
I think this one should be the right output for the first example.
Below you can find my fix to this problem, based on the assumption that
createRestriction must return null if the restriction (neither composite
nor simple) cannot be constructed.
At PatternBuilder.java, substitute createRestriction by...
private Restriction createRestriction(final RuleBuildContext context,
final Pattern pattern,
final FieldConstraintDescr
fieldConstraintDescr,
final RestrictionConnectiveDescr
top,
final InternalReadAccessor
extractor) {
Restriction[] restrictions = new
Restriction[top.getRestrictions().size()];
int index = 0;
for ( Iterator it = top.getRestrictions().iterator(); it.hasNext();
) {
RestrictionDescr restrictionDescr = (RestrictionDescr)
it.next();
if ( restrictionDescr instanceof RestrictionConnectiveDescr ) {
restrictions[index] = this.createRestriction( context,
pattern,
fieldConstraintDescr,
(RestrictionConnectiveDescr) restrictionDescr,
extractor );
} else {
restrictions[index] = buildRestriction( context,
pattern,
extractor,
fieldConstraintDescr,
restrictionDescr );
if ( restrictions[index] == null ) {
context.getErrors().add( new DescrBuildError(
context.getParentDescr(),
fieldConstraintDescr,
null,
"Unable
to create restriction '" + restrictionDescr.toString() + "' for field
'" +
fieldConstraintDescr.getFieldName() + "' in the rule '" +
context.getRule().getName() + "'" ) );
}
}
if(restrictions[index] == null)
{
index = 0;
break;
}
else
{
index++;
}
}
if(index == 0) {
return null;
} else if ( restrictions.length > 1 ) {
AbstractCompositeRestriction composite = null;
if ( top.getConnective() == RestrictionConnectiveDescr.AND ) {
composite = new AndCompositeRestriction( restrictions );
} else if ( top.getConnective() ==
RestrictionConnectiveDescr.OR ) {
composite = new OrCompositeRestriction( restrictions );
} else {
context.getErrors().add( new DescrBuildError(
context.getParentDescr(),
fieldConstraintDescr,
null,
"This is a
bug: Impossible to create a composite restriction for connective: " +
top.getConnective() + "' for field '" +
fieldConstraintDescr.getFieldName()
+ "' in the rule '"
+
context.getRule().getName() + "'" ) );
}
return composite;
} else if ( restrictions.length == 1 ) {
return restrictions[0];
}
context.getErrors().add( new DescrBuildError(
context.getParentDescr(),
fieldConstraintDescr,
null,
"This is a bug:
trying to create a restriction for an empty restriction list for field '" +
fieldConstraintDescr.getFieldName() + "' in the rule '" +
context.getRule().getName() + "'" ) );
return null;
}
Kind regards,
Manuel Ortiz.
2011/12/22 Wolfgang Laun <wolfgang.laun(a)gmail.com>
Now would you mind posting an example reproducing this error...
-W
On 22/12/2011, Manuel Ortiz <manuel.ortizramos(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Sirs:
>
> I'm working on an application which writes a set of rules using
information
> which is stored in BDD tables. This information can be 'wrong' concerning
> rule compilation, and I expect that Drools reports the corresponding
> compilation errors.
>
> I've found that PatternBuilder.createRestriction() fails to process
> composite restrictions when one of the single restrictions cannot be
> implemented. The problem is that although one of the sigle restrictions
is
> returned null, the composite restriction array is succesfully returned,
one
> of its elements being null, wich causes a NullPointerException when the
> composite restriction is processed in
> PatternBuilder.build(AbstractCompositeConstraint version) to obtain a
> MultiRestrictionFieldConstraint object.
>
> I would like to know if this bug has yet been reported and fixed in some
> Drools version beyond 5.1.1
>
> Thank you very much for your time.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Manuel Ortiz
>
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
3:34 a.m.
Using an undeclared static variable (Message.HELLO) wasn't handled
cleanly in 5.1.1. This has been fixed in 5.2.0.
-W
2011/12/22 Manuel Ortiz <manuel.ortizramos(a)gmail.com>:
Dear Wolfgang:
Just change the "Hello World" rule in the "Hello World" example by
this
one...
rule "Hello World"
when
m : Message( status == Message.HELLO || != "WrongType", myMessage : message
)
then
System.out.println( myMessage );
m.setMessage( "Goodbye cruel world" );
m.setStatus( Message.GOODBYE );
update( m );
end
...and you will get the following building error:
Description Resource Path Location Type
Error: java.lang.NullPointerException Sample.drl /DroolsTest2/src/main/rules
Unknown Drools Error
This NullPointerException breaks the normal drools compiler execution flow.
In contrast, if you use the following "Hello World" rule...
rule "Hello World"
when
m : Message( status != "WrongType", myMessage : message )
then
System.out.println( myMessage );
m.setMessage( "Goodbye cruel world" );
m.setStatus( Message.GOODBYE );
update( m );
end
...then you get the following building errors:
Description Resource Path Location Type
BuildError: Unable to create a Field value of type 'ValueType = 'int''
and
value 'WrongType' Sample.drl /DroolsTest2/src/main/rules Unknown Drools
Error
BuildError: Unable to create restriction '[LiteralRestriction: !=
WrongType]' for field 'status' in the rule 'Hello World' Sample.drl
/DroolsTest2/src/main/rules line 7 Drools Error
which don't break the drools compiler execution flow.
I think this one should be the right output for the first example.
Below you can find my fix to this problem, based on the assumption that
createRestriction must return null if the restriction (neither composite nor
simple) cannot be constructed.
At PatternBuilder.java, substitute createRestriction by...
private Restriction createRestriction(final RuleBuildContext context,
final Pattern pattern,
final FieldConstraintDescr
fieldConstraintDescr,
final RestrictionConnectiveDescr
top,
final InternalReadAccessor
extractor) {
Restriction[] restrictions = new
Restriction[top.getRestrictions().size()];
int index = 0;
for ( Iterator it = top.getRestrictions().iterator(); it.hasNext();
) {
RestrictionDescr restrictionDescr = (RestrictionDescr)
it.next();
if ( restrictionDescr instanceof RestrictionConnectiveDescr ) {
restrictions[index] = this.createRestriction( context,
pattern,
fieldConstraintDescr,
(RestrictionConnectiveDescr) restrictionDescr,
extractor );
} else {
restrictions[index] = buildRestriction( context,
pattern,
extractor,
fieldConstraintDescr,
restrictionDescr );
if ( restrictions[index] == null ) {
context.getErrors().add( new DescrBuildError(
context.getParentDescr(),
fieldConstraintDescr,
null,
"Unable to
create restriction '" + restrictionDescr.toString() + "' for field
'" +
fieldConstraintDescr.getFieldName() + "' in the rule '" +
context.getRule().getName() + "'" ) );
}
}
if(restrictions[index] == null)
{
index = 0;
break;
}
else
{
index++;
}
}
if(index == 0) {
return null;
} else if ( restrictions.length > 1 ) {
AbstractCompositeRestriction composite = null;
if ( top.getConnective() == RestrictionConnectiveDescr.AND ) {
composite = new AndCompositeRestriction( restrictions );
} else if ( top.getConnective() == RestrictionConnectiveDescr.OR
) {
composite = new OrCompositeRestriction( restrictions );
} else {
context.getErrors().add( new DescrBuildError(
context.getParentDescr(),
fieldConstraintDescr,
null,
"This is a
bug: Impossible to create a composite restriction for connective: " +
top.getConnective() + "' for field '" +
fieldConstraintDescr.getFieldName()
+ "' in the rule '"
+
context.getRule().getName() + "'" ) );
}
return composite;
} else if ( restrictions.length == 1 ) {
return restrictions[0];
}
context.getErrors().add( new DescrBuildError(
context.getParentDescr(),
fieldConstraintDescr,
null,
"This is a bug: trying
to create a restriction for an empty restriction list for field '" +
fieldConstraintDescr.getFieldName() + "' in the rule '" +
context.getRule().getName() + "'" ) );
return null;
}
Kind regards,
Manuel Ortiz.
2011/12/22 Wolfgang Laun <wolfgang.laun(a)gmail.com>
>
> Now would you mind posting an example reproducing this error...
> -W
>
> On 22/12/2011, Manuel Ortiz <manuel.ortizramos(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > Dear Sirs:
> >
> > I'm working on an application which writes a set of rules using
> > information
> > which is stored in BDD tables. This information can be 'wrong'
> > concerning
> > rule compilation, and I expect that Drools reports the corresponding
> > compilation errors.
> >
> > I've found that PatternBuilder.createRestriction() fails to process
> > composite restrictions when one of the single restrictions cannot be
> > implemented. The problem is that although one of the sigle restrictions
> > is
> > returned null, the composite restriction array is succesfully returned,
> > one
> > of its elements being null, wich causes a NullPointerException when the
> > composite restriction is processed in
> > PatternBuilder.build(AbstractCompositeConstraint version) to obtain a
> > MultiRestrictionFieldConstraint object.
> >
> > I would like to know if this bug has yet been reported and fixed in some
> > Drools version beyond 5.1.1
> >
> > Thank you very much for your time.
> >
> > Kind regards,
> >
> > Manuel Ortiz
> >
> _______________________________________________
> 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
4:21 a.m.
Dear Wolfgang:
Sorry, I don't understand your answer very well. The bug I report has to do
with composite restrictions, not with static variable declarations. Maybe
my bug description is not very good.
I used "Hello world" example described at
http://downloads.jboss.com/drools/docs/5.1.1.34858.FINAL/drools-expert/ht...
changing the first single restriction to a composite restriction in which
the second part of the restriction compares an int to a string literal to
fire a wrong type rule compile error. But as this second restriction
belongs to a composite restriction, the composite one is created with a
null component, no compile error reported.
I understand that Message.HELLO is correctly declared in the "Hello World"
example project and that this static variable shouldn't be a problem at
compiling. In fact, if you change the static variable by a literal number,
the error would be the same.
Sorry for my english. I hope this explanation helps to understand the bug.
Kind regards,
Manuel Ortiz.
2011/12/22 Wolfgang Laun <wolfgang.laun(a)gmail.com>
Using an undeclared static variable (Message.HELLO) wasn't
handled
cleanly in 5.1.1. This has been fixed in 5.2.0.
-W
2011/12/22 Manuel Ortiz <manuel.ortizramos(a)gmail.com>:
> Dear Wolfgang:
>
> Just change the "Hello World" rule in the "Hello World" example
by this
> one...
>
> rule "Hello World"
> when
> m : Message( status == Message.HELLO || != "WrongType", myMessage :
message
> )
> then
> System.out.println( myMessage );
> m.setMessage( "Goodbye cruel world" );
> m.setStatus( Message.GOODBYE );
> update( m );
> end
>
> ...and you will get the following building error:
>
> Description Resource Path Location Type
> Error: java.lang.NullPointerException Sample.drl
/DroolsTest2/src/main/rules
> Unknown Drools Error
>
> This NullPointerException breaks the normal drools compiler execution
flow.
> In contrast, if you use the following "Hello World" rule...
>
> rule "Hello World"
> when
> m : Message( status != "WrongType", myMessage : message )
> then
> System.out.println( myMessage );
> m.setMessage( "Goodbye cruel world" );
> m.setStatus( Message.GOODBYE );
> update( m );
> end
>
> ...then you get the following building errors:
>
> Description Resource Path Location Type
> BuildError: Unable to create a Field value of type 'ValueType =
'int''
and
> value 'WrongType' Sample.drl /DroolsTest2/src/main/rules Unknown Drools
> Error
> BuildError: Unable to create restriction '[LiteralRestriction: !=
> WrongType]' for field 'status' in the rule 'Hello World'
Sample.drl
> /DroolsTest2/src/main/rules line 7 Drools Error
>
> which don't break the drools compiler execution flow.
>
> I think this one should be the right output for the first example.
>
> Below you can find my fix to this problem, based on the assumption that
> createRestriction must return null if the restriction (neither composite
nor
> simple) cannot be constructed.
>
> At PatternBuilder.java, substitute createRestriction by...
>
> private Restriction createRestriction(final RuleBuildContext context,
> final Pattern pattern,
> final FieldConstraintDescr
> fieldConstraintDescr,
> final
RestrictionConnectiveDescr
> top,
> final InternalReadAccessor
> extractor) {
> Restriction[] restrictions = new
> Restriction[top.getRestrictions().size()];
> int index = 0;
>
> for ( Iterator it = top.getRestrictions().iterator();
it.hasNext();
> ) {
> RestrictionDescr restrictionDescr = (RestrictionDescr)
> it.next();
>
> if ( restrictionDescr instanceof RestrictionConnectiveDescr
) {
> restrictions[index] = this.createRestriction( context,
> pattern,
>
> fieldConstraintDescr,
>
> (RestrictionConnectiveDescr) restrictionDescr,
>
extractor );
>
> } else {
> restrictions[index] = buildRestriction( context,
> pattern,
> extractor,
>
> fieldConstraintDescr,
> restrictionDescr
);
> if ( restrictions[index] == null ) {
> context.getErrors().add( new DescrBuildError(
> context.getParentDescr(),
>
> fieldConstraintDescr,
> null,
>
"Unable to
> create restriction '" + restrictionDescr.toString() + "' for field
'" +
> fieldConstraintDescr.getFieldName() + "' in the rule '" +
> context.getRule().getName() + "'" ) );
> }
> }
>
> if(restrictions[index] == null)
> {
> index = 0;
> break;
> }
> else
> {
> index++;
> }
> }
>
> if(index == 0) {
> return null;
> } else if ( restrictions.length > 1 ) {
> AbstractCompositeRestriction composite = null;
> if ( top.getConnective() == RestrictionConnectiveDescr.AND )
{
> composite = new AndCompositeRestriction( restrictions );
> } else if ( top.getConnective() ==
RestrictionConnectiveDescr.OR
> ) {
> composite = new OrCompositeRestriction( restrictions );
> } else {
> context.getErrors().add( new DescrBuildError(
> context.getParentDescr(),
>
> fieldConstraintDescr,
> null,
> "This is a
> bug: Impossible to create a composite restriction for connective: " +
> top.getConnective() + "' for field '" +
fieldConstraintDescr.getFieldName()
> + "' in the rule '"
> +
> context.getRule().getName() + "'" ) );
> }
>
> return composite;
> } else if ( restrictions.length == 1 ) {
> return restrictions[0];
> }
> context.getErrors().add( new DescrBuildError(
> context.getParentDescr(),
>
fieldConstraintDescr,
> null,
> "This is a bug:
trying
> to create a restriction for an empty restriction list for field '" +
> fieldConstraintDescr.getFieldName() + "' in the rule '" +
> context.getRule().getName() + "'" ) );
> return null;
> }
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Manuel Ortiz.
>
>
> 2011/12/22 Wolfgang Laun <wolfgang.laun(a)gmail.com>
>>
>> Now would you mind posting an example reproducing this error...
>> -W
>>
>> On 22/12/2011, Manuel Ortiz <manuel.ortizramos(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Dear Sirs:
>> >
>> > I'm working on an application which writes a set of rules using
>> > information
>> > which is stored in BDD tables. This information can be 'wrong'
>> > concerning
>> > rule compilation, and I expect that Drools reports the corresponding
>> > compilation errors.
>> >
>> > I've found that PatternBuilder.createRestriction() fails to process
>> > composite restrictions when one of the single restrictions cannot be
>> > implemented. The problem is that although one of the sigle
restrictions
>> > is
>> > returned null, the composite restriction array is succesfully
returned,
>> > one
>> > of its elements being null, wich causes a NullPointerException when
the
>> > composite restriction is processed in
>> > PatternBuilder.build(AbstractCompositeConstraint version) to obtain a
>> > MultiRestrictionFieldConstraint object.
>> >
>> > I would like to know if this bug has yet been reported and fixed in
some
>> > Drools version beyond 5.1.1
>> >
>> > Thank you very much for your time.
>> >
>> > Kind regards,
>> >
>> > Manuel Ortiz
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
4:29 a.m.
Sorry - I should have made it clear that it doesn't matter *why* one
of the components of a composite restriction is in error. Either a
missing declaration or a type incompatibility - it results in a null
reference, and some agent processing this doesn't check.
-W
2011/12/22 Manuel Ortiz <manuel.ortizramos(a)gmail.com>:
Dear Wolfgang:
Sorry, I don't understand your answer very well. The bug I report has to do
with composite restrictions, not with static variable declarations. Maybe my
bug description is not very good.
I used "Hello world" example described at
http://downloads.jboss.com/drools/docs/5.1.1.34858.FINAL/drools-expert/ht...
changing the first single restriction to a composite restriction in which
the second part of the restriction compares an int to a string literal to
fire a wrong type rule compile error. But as this second restriction belongs
to a composite restriction, the composite one is created with a null
component, no compile error reported.
I understand that Message.HELLO is correctly declared in the "Hello World"
example project and that this static variable shouldn't be a problem at
compiling. In fact, if you change the static variable by a literal number,
the error would be the same.
Sorry for my english. I hope this explanation helps to understand the bug.
Kind regards,
Manuel Ortiz.
2011/12/22 Wolfgang Laun <wolfgang.laun(a)gmail.com>
>
> Using an undeclared static variable (Message.HELLO) wasn't handled
> cleanly in 5.1.1. This has been fixed in 5.2.0.
> -W
>
>
> 2011/12/22 Manuel Ortiz <manuel.ortizramos(a)gmail.com>:
> > Dear Wolfgang:
> >
> > Just change the "Hello World" rule in the "Hello World"
example by this
> > one...
> >
> > rule "Hello World"
> > when
> > m : Message( status == Message.HELLO || != "WrongType", myMessage :
> > message
> > )
> > then
> > System.out.println( myMessage );
> > m.setMessage( "Goodbye cruel world" );
> > m.setStatus( Message.GOODBYE );
> > update( m );
> > end
> >
> > ...and you will get the following building error:
> >
> > Description Resource Path Location Type
> > Error: java.lang.NullPointerException Sample.drl
> > /DroolsTest2/src/main/rules
> > Unknown Drools Error
> >
> > This NullPointerException breaks the normal drools compiler execution
> > flow.
> > In contrast, if you use the following "Hello World" rule...
> >
> > rule "Hello World"
> > when
> > m : Message( status != "WrongType", myMessage : message )
> > then
> > System.out.println( myMessage );
> > m.setMessage( "Goodbye cruel world" );
> > m.setStatus( Message.GOODBYE );
> > update( m );
> > end
> >
> > ...then you get the following building errors:
> >
> > Description Resource Path Location Type
> > BuildError: Unable to create a Field value of type 'ValueType =
'int''
> > and
> > value 'WrongType' Sample.drl /DroolsTest2/src/main/rules Unknown Drools
> > Error
> > BuildError: Unable to create restriction '[LiteralRestriction: !=
> > WrongType]' for field 'status' in the rule 'Hello World'
Sample.drl
> > /DroolsTest2/src/main/rules line 7 Drools Error
> >
> > which don't break the drools compiler execution flow.
> >
> > I think this one should be the right output for the first example.
> >
> > Below you can find my fix to this problem, based on the assumption that
> > createRestriction must return null if the restriction (neither composite
> > nor
> > simple) cannot be constructed.
> >
> > At PatternBuilder.java, substitute createRestriction by...
> >
> > private Restriction createRestriction(final RuleBuildContext
> > context,
> > final Pattern pattern,
> > final FieldConstraintDescr
> > fieldConstraintDescr,
> > final
> > RestrictionConnectiveDescr
> > top,
> > final InternalReadAccessor
> > extractor) {
> > Restriction[] restrictions = new
> > Restriction[top.getRestrictions().size()];
> > int index = 0;
> >
> > for ( Iterator it = top.getRestrictions().iterator();
> > it.hasNext();
> > ) {
> > RestrictionDescr restrictionDescr = (RestrictionDescr)
> > it.next();
> >
> > if ( restrictionDescr instanceof RestrictionConnectiveDescr
> > ) {
> > restrictions[index] = this.createRestriction( context,
> > pattern,
> >
> > fieldConstraintDescr,
> >
> > (RestrictionConnectiveDescr) restrictionDescr,
> >
> > extractor );
> >
> > } else {
> > restrictions[index] = buildRestriction( context,
> > pattern,
> > extractor,
> >
> > fieldConstraintDescr,
> > restrictionDescr
> > );
> > if ( restrictions[index] == null ) {
> > context.getErrors().add( new DescrBuildError(
> > context.getParentDescr(),
> >
> > fieldConstraintDescr,
> > null,
> >
> > "Unable to
> > create restriction '" + restrictionDescr.toString() + "' for
field '" +
> > fieldConstraintDescr.getFieldName() + "' in the rule '" +
> > context.getRule().getName() + "'" ) );
> > }
> > }
> >
> > if(restrictions[index] == null)
> > {
> > index = 0;
> > break;
> > }
> > else
> > {
> > index++;
> > }
> > }
> >
> > if(index == 0) {
> > return null;
> > } else if ( restrictions.length > 1 ) {
> > AbstractCompositeRestriction composite = null;
> > if ( top.getConnective() == RestrictionConnectiveDescr.AND )
> > {
> > composite = new AndCompositeRestriction( restrictions );
> > } else if ( top.getConnective() ==
> > RestrictionConnectiveDescr.OR
> > ) {
> > composite = new OrCompositeRestriction( restrictions );
> > } else {
> > context.getErrors().add( new DescrBuildError(
> > context.getParentDescr(),
> >
> > fieldConstraintDescr,
> > null,
> > "This is a
> > bug: Impossible to create a composite restriction for connective: " +
> > top.getConnective() + "' for field '" +
> > fieldConstraintDescr.getFieldName()
> > + "' in the rule '"
> > +
> > context.getRule().getName() + "'" ) );
> > }
> >
> > return composite;
> > } else if ( restrictions.length == 1 ) {
> > return restrictions[0];
> > }
> > context.getErrors().add( new DescrBuildError(
> > context.getParentDescr(),
> >
> > fieldConstraintDescr,
> > null,
> > "This is a bug:
> > trying
> > to create a restriction for an empty restriction list for field '" +
> > fieldConstraintDescr.getFieldName() + "' in the rule '" +
> > context.getRule().getName() + "'" ) );
> > return null;
> > }
> >
> > Kind regards,
> >
> > Manuel Ortiz.
> >
> >
> > 2011/12/22 Wolfgang Laun <wolfgang.laun(a)gmail.com>
> >>
> >> Now would you mind posting an example reproducing this error...
> >> -W
> >>
> >> On 22/12/2011, Manuel Ortiz <manuel.ortizramos(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > Dear Sirs:
> >> >
> >> > I'm working on an application which writes a set of rules using
> >> > information
> >> > which is stored in BDD tables. This information can be 'wrong'
> >> > concerning
> >> > rule compilation, and I expect that Drools reports the corresponding
> >> > compilation errors.
> >> >
> >> > I've found that PatternBuilder.createRestriction() fails to
process
> >> > composite restrictions when one of the single restrictions cannot be
> >> > implemented. The problem is that although one of the sigle
> >> > restrictions
> >> > is
> >> > returned null, the composite restriction array is succesfully
> >> > returned,
> >> > one
> >> > of its elements being null, wich causes a NullPointerException when
> >> > the
> >> > composite restriction is processed in
> >> > PatternBuilder.build(AbstractCompositeConstraint version) to obtain a
> >> > MultiRestrictionFieldConstraint object.
> >> >
> >> > I would like to know if this bug has yet been reported and fixed in
> >> > some
> >> > Drools version beyond 5.1.1
> >> >
> >> > Thank you very much for your time.
> >> >
> >> > Kind regards,
> >> >
> >> > Manuel Ortiz
> >> >
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
4:36 a.m.
Thank you very much Wolfgang.
Then I understand that this composite restriction compiling error is fixed
in 5.2.0. Isn't it?
Thank you again for your time.
Kind regards,
Manuel Ortiz.
2011/12/22 Wolfgang Laun <wolfgang.laun(a)gmail.com>
Sorry - I should have made it clear that it doesn't matter *why*
one
of the components of a composite restriction is in error. Either a
missing declaration or a type incompatibility - it results in a null
reference, and some agent processing this doesn't check.
-W
2011/12/22 Manuel Ortiz <manuel.ortizramos(a)gmail.com>:
> Dear Wolfgang:
>
> Sorry, I don't understand your answer very well. The bug I report has to
do
> with composite restrictions, not with static variable declarations.
Maybe my
> bug description is not very good.
>
> I used "Hello world" example described at
>
>
http://downloads.jboss.com/drools/docs/5.1.1.34858.FINAL/drools-expert/ht...
>
> changing the first single restriction to a composite restriction in which
> the second part of the restriction compares an int to a string literal to
> fire a wrong type rule compile error. But as this second restriction
belongs
> to a composite restriction, the composite one is created with a null
> component, no compile error reported.
>
> I understand that Message.HELLO is correctly declared in the "Hello
World"
> example project and that this static variable shouldn't be a problem at
> compiling. In fact, if you change the static variable by a literal
number,
> the error would be the same.
>
> Sorry for my english. I hope this explanation helps to understand the
bug.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Manuel Ortiz.
>
> 2011/12/22 Wolfgang Laun <wolfgang.laun(a)gmail.com>
>>
>> Using an undeclared static variable (Message.HELLO) wasn't handled
>> cleanly in 5.1.1. This has been fixed in 5.2.0.
>> -W
>>
>>
>> 2011/12/22 Manuel Ortiz <manuel.ortizramos(a)gmail.com>:
>> > Dear Wolfgang:
>> >
>> > Just change the "Hello World" rule in the "Hello World"
example by
this
>> > one...
>> >
>> > rule "Hello World"
>> > when
>> > m : Message( status == Message.HELLO || != "WrongType", myMessage
:
>> > message
>> > )
>> > then
>> > System.out.println( myMessage );
>> > m.setMessage( "Goodbye cruel world" );
>> > m.setStatus( Message.GOODBYE );
>> > update( m );
>> > end
>> >
>> > ...and you will get the following building error:
>> >
>> > Description Resource Path Location Type
>> > Error: java.lang.NullPointerException Sample.drl
>> > /DroolsTest2/src/main/rules
>> > Unknown Drools Error
>> >
>> > This NullPointerException breaks the normal drools compiler execution
>> > flow.
>> > In contrast, if you use the following "Hello World" rule...
>> >
>> > rule "Hello World"
>> > when
>> > m : Message( status != "WrongType", myMessage : message )
>> > then
>> > System.out.println( myMessage );
>> > m.setMessage( "Goodbye cruel world" );
>> > m.setStatus( Message.GOODBYE );
>> > update( m );
>> > end
>> >
>> > ...then you get the following building errors:
>> >
>> > Description Resource Path Location Type
>> > BuildError: Unable to create a Field value of type 'ValueType =
'int''
>> > and
>> > value 'WrongType' Sample.drl /DroolsTest2/src/main/rules Unknown
Drools
>> > Error
>> > BuildError: Unable to create restriction '[LiteralRestriction: !=
>> > WrongType]' for field 'status' in the rule 'Hello
World' Sample.drl
>> > /DroolsTest2/src/main/rules line 7 Drools Error
>> >
>> > which don't break the drools compiler execution flow.
>> >
>> > I think this one should be the right output for the first example.
>> >
>> > Below you can find my fix to this problem, based on the assumption
that
>> > createRestriction must return null if the restriction (neither
composite
>> > nor
>> > simple) cannot be constructed.
>> >
>> > At PatternBuilder.java, substitute createRestriction by...
>> >
>> > private Restriction createRestriction(final RuleBuildContext
>> > context,
>> > final Pattern pattern,
>> > final FieldConstraintDescr
>> > fieldConstraintDescr,
>> > final
>> > RestrictionConnectiveDescr
>> > top,
>> > final InternalReadAccessor
>> > extractor) {
>> > Restriction[] restrictions = new
>> > Restriction[top.getRestrictions().size()];
>> > int index = 0;
>> >
>> > for ( Iterator it = top.getRestrictions().iterator();
>> > it.hasNext();
>> > ) {
>> > RestrictionDescr restrictionDescr = (RestrictionDescr)
>> > it.next();
>> >
>> > if ( restrictionDescr instanceof
RestrictionConnectiveDescr
>> > ) {
>> > restrictions[index] = this.createRestriction( context,
>> >
pattern,
>> >
>> > fieldConstraintDescr,
>> >
>> > (RestrictionConnectiveDescr) restrictionDescr,
>> >
>> > extractor );
>> >
>> > } else {
>> > restrictions[index] = buildRestriction( context,
>> > pattern,
>> > extractor,
>> >
>> > fieldConstraintDescr,
>> >
restrictionDescr
>> > );
>> > if ( restrictions[index] == null ) {
>> > context.getErrors().add( new DescrBuildError(
>> > context.getParentDescr(),
>> >
>> > fieldConstraintDescr,
>> >
null,
>> >
>> > "Unable to
>> > create restriction '" + restrictionDescr.toString() + "'
for field '"
+
>> > fieldConstraintDescr.getFieldName() + "' in the rule '"
+
>> > context.getRule().getName() + "'" ) );
>> > }
>> > }
>> >
>> > if(restrictions[index] == null)
>> > {
>> > index = 0;
>> > break;
>> > }
>> > else
>> > {
>> > index++;
>> > }
>> > }
>> >
>> > if(index == 0) {
>> > return null;
>> > } else if ( restrictions.length > 1 ) {
>> > AbstractCompositeRestriction composite = null;
>> > if ( top.getConnective() ==
RestrictionConnectiveDescr.AND )
>> > {
>> > composite = new AndCompositeRestriction( restrictions
);
>> > } else if ( top.getConnective() ==
>> > RestrictionConnectiveDescr.OR
>> > ) {
>> > composite = new OrCompositeRestriction( restrictions
);
>> > } else {
>> > context.getErrors().add( new DescrBuildError(
>> > context.getParentDescr(),
>> >
>> > fieldConstraintDescr,
>> > null,
>> > "This
is a
>> > bug: Impossible to create a composite restriction for connective: " +
>> > top.getConnective() + "' for field '" +
>> > fieldConstraintDescr.getFieldName()
>> > + "' in the rule '"
>> >
+
>> > context.getRule().getName() + "'" ) );
>> > }
>> >
>> > return composite;
>> > } else if ( restrictions.length == 1 ) {
>> > return restrictions[0];
>> > }
>> > context.getErrors().add( new DescrBuildError(
>> > context.getParentDescr(),
>> >
>> > fieldConstraintDescr,
>> > null,
>> > "This is a bug:
>> > trying
>> > to create a restriction for an empty restriction list for field '"
+
>> > fieldConstraintDescr.getFieldName() + "' in the rule '"
+
>> > context.getRule().getName() + "'" ) );
>> > return null;
>> > }
>> >
>> > Kind regards,
>> >
>> > Manuel Ortiz.
>> >
>> >
>> > 2011/12/22 Wolfgang Laun <wolfgang.laun(a)gmail.com>
>> >>
>> >> Now would you mind posting an example reproducing this error...
>> >> -W
>> >>
>> >> On 22/12/2011, Manuel Ortiz <manuel.ortizramos(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> > Dear Sirs:
>> >> >
>> >> > I'm working on an application which writes a set of rules
using
>> >> > information
>> >> > which is stored in BDD tables. This information can be
'wrong'
>> >> > concerning
>> >> > rule compilation, and I expect that Drools reports the
corresponding
>> >> > compilation errors.
>> >> >
>> >> > I've found that PatternBuilder.createRestriction() fails to
process
>> >> > composite restrictions when one of the single restrictions cannot
be
>> >> > implemented. The problem is that although one of the sigle
>> >> > restrictions
>> >> > is
>> >> > returned null, the composite restriction array is succesfully
>> >> > returned,
>> >> > one
>> >> > of its elements being null, wich causes a NullPointerException
when
>> >> > the
>> >> > composite restriction is processed in
>> >> > PatternBuilder.build(AbstractCompositeConstraint version) to
obtain a
>> >> > MultiRestrictionFieldConstraint object.
>> >> >
>> >> > I would like to know if this bug has yet been reported and fixed
in
>> >> > some
>> >> > Drools version beyond 5.1.1
>> >> >
>> >> > Thank you very much for your time.
>> >> >
>> >> > Kind regards,
>> >> >
>> >> > Manuel Ortiz
>> >> >
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> 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
>> >
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
5:06 a.m.
2011/12/22 Manuel Ortiz <manuel.ortizramos(a)gmail.com>:
Thank you very much Wolfgang.
Then I understand that this composite restriction compiling error is fixed
in 5.2.0. Isn't it?
Yes.
-W
Thank you again for your time.
Kind regards,
Manuel Ortiz.
2011/12/22 Wolfgang Laun <wolfgang.laun(a)gmail.com>
>
> Sorry - I should have made it clear that it doesn't matter *why* one
> of the components of a composite restriction is in error. Either a
> missing declaration or a type incompatibility - it results in a null
> reference, and some agent processing this doesn't check.
>
> -W
>
> 2011/12/22 Manuel Ortiz <manuel.ortizramos(a)gmail.com>:
> > Dear Wolfgang:
> >
> > Sorry, I don't understand your answer very well. The bug I report has to
> > do
> > with composite restrictions, not with static variable declarations.
> > Maybe my
> > bug description is not very good.
> >
> > I used "Hello world" example described at
> >
> >
> >
http://downloads.jboss.com/drools/docs/5.1.1.34858.FINAL/drools-expert/ht...
> >
> > changing the first single restriction to a composite restriction in
> > which
> > the second part of the restriction compares an int to a string literal
> > to
> > fire a wrong type rule compile error. But as this second restriction
> > belongs
> > to a composite restriction, the composite one is created with a null
> > component, no compile error reported.
> >
> > I understand that Message.HELLO is correctly declared in the "Hello
> > World"
> > example project and that this static variable shouldn't be a problem at
> > compiling. In fact, if you change the static variable by a literal
> > number,
> > the error would be the same.
> >
> > Sorry for my english. I hope this explanation helps to understand the
> > bug.
> >
> > Kind regards,
> >
> > Manuel Ortiz.
> >
> > 2011/12/22 Wolfgang Laun <wolfgang.laun(a)gmail.com>
> >>
> >> Using an undeclared static variable (Message.HELLO) wasn't handled
> >> cleanly in 5.1.1. This has been fixed in 5.2.0.
> >> -W
> >>
> >>
> >> 2011/12/22 Manuel Ortiz <manuel.ortizramos(a)gmail.com>:
> >> > Dear Wolfgang:
> >> >
> >> > Just change the "Hello World" rule in the "Hello
World" example by
> >> > this
> >> > one...
> >> >
> >> > rule "Hello World"
> >> > when
> >> > m : Message( status == Message.HELLO || != "WrongType",
myMessage :
> >> > message
> >> > )
> >> > then
> >> > System.out.println( myMessage );
> >> > m.setMessage( "Goodbye cruel world" );
> >> > m.setStatus( Message.GOODBYE );
> >> > update( m );
> >> > end
> >> >
> >> > ...and you will get the following building error:
> >> >
> >> > Description Resource Path Location Type
> >> > Error: java.lang.NullPointerException Sample.drl
> >> > /DroolsTest2/src/main/rules
> >> > Unknown Drools Error
> >> >
> >> > This NullPointerException breaks the normal drools compiler execution
> >> > flow.
> >> > In contrast, if you use the following "Hello World" rule...
> >> >
> >> > rule "Hello World"
> >> > when
> >> > m : Message( status != "WrongType", myMessage : message )
> >> > then
> >> > System.out.println( myMessage );
> >> > m.setMessage( "Goodbye cruel world" );
> >> > m.setStatus( Message.GOODBYE );
> >> > update( m );
> >> > end
> >> >
> >> > ...then you get the following building errors:
> >> >
> >> > Description Resource Path Location Type
> >> > BuildError: Unable to create a Field value of type 'ValueType =
> >> > 'int''
> >> > and
> >> > value 'WrongType' Sample.drl /DroolsTest2/src/main/rules
Unknown
> >> > Drools
> >> > Error
> >> > BuildError: Unable to create restriction '[LiteralRestriction: !=
> >> > WrongType]' for field 'status' in the rule 'Hello
World' Sample.drl
> >> > /DroolsTest2/src/main/rules line 7 Drools Error
> >> >
> >> > which don't break the drools compiler execution flow.
> >> >
> >> > I think this one should be the right output for the first example.
> >> >
> >> > Below you can find my fix to this problem, based on the assumption
> >> > that
> >> > createRestriction must return null if the restriction (neither
> >> > composite
> >> > nor
> >> > simple) cannot be constructed.
> >> >
> >> > At PatternBuilder.java, substitute createRestriction by...
> >> >
> >> > private Restriction createRestriction(final RuleBuildContext
> >> > context,
> >> > final Pattern pattern,
> >> > final FieldConstraintDescr
> >> > fieldConstraintDescr,
> >> > final
> >> > RestrictionConnectiveDescr
> >> > top,
> >> > final InternalReadAccessor
> >> > extractor) {
> >> > Restriction[] restrictions = new
> >> > Restriction[top.getRestrictions().size()];
> >> > int index = 0;
> >> >
> >> > for ( Iterator it = top.getRestrictions().iterator();
> >> > it.hasNext();
> >> > ) {
> >> > RestrictionDescr restrictionDescr = (RestrictionDescr)
> >> > it.next();
> >> >
> >> > if ( restrictionDescr instanceof
> >> > RestrictionConnectiveDescr
> >> > ) {
> >> > restrictions[index] = this.createRestriction(
> >> > context,
> >> >
> >> > pattern,
> >> >
> >> > fieldConstraintDescr,
> >> >
> >> > (RestrictionConnectiveDescr) restrictionDescr,
> >> >
> >> > extractor );
> >> >
> >> > } else {
> >> > restrictions[index] = buildRestriction( context,
> >> > pattern,
> >> > extractor,
> >> >
> >> > fieldConstraintDescr,
> >> >
> >> > restrictionDescr
> >> > );
> >> > if ( restrictions[index] == null ) {
> >> > context.getErrors().add( new DescrBuildError(
> >> > context.getParentDescr(),
> >> >
> >> > fieldConstraintDescr,
> >> >
> >> > null,
> >> >
> >> > "Unable to
> >> > create restriction '" + restrictionDescr.toString() +
"' for field '"
> >> > +
> >> > fieldConstraintDescr.getFieldName() + "' in the rule
'" +
> >> > context.getRule().getName() + "'" ) );
> >> > }
> >> > }
> >> >
> >> > if(restrictions[index] == null)
> >> > {
> >> > index = 0;
> >> > break;
> >> > }
> >> > else
> >> > {
> >> > index++;
> >> > }
> >> > }
> >> >
> >> > if(index == 0) {
> >> > return null;
> >> > } else if ( restrictions.length > 1 ) {
> >> > AbstractCompositeRestriction composite = null;
> >> > if ( top.getConnective() ==
> >> > RestrictionConnectiveDescr.AND )
> >> > {
> >> > composite = new AndCompositeRestriction( restrictions
> >> > );
> >> > } else if ( top.getConnective() ==
> >> > RestrictionConnectiveDescr.OR
> >> > ) {
> >> > composite = new OrCompositeRestriction( restrictions
> >> > );
> >> > } else {
> >> > context.getErrors().add( new DescrBuildError(
> >> > context.getParentDescr(),
> >> >
> >> > fieldConstraintDescr,
> >> > null,
> >> >
"This
> >> > is a
> >> > bug: Impossible to create a composite restriction for connective:
" +
> >> > top.getConnective() + "' for field '" +
> >> > fieldConstraintDescr.getFieldName()
> >> > + "' in the rule '"
> >> >
> >> > +
> >> > context.getRule().getName() + "'" ) );
> >> > }
> >> >
> >> > return composite;
> >> > } else if ( restrictions.length == 1 ) {
> >> > return restrictions[0];
> >> > }
> >> > context.getErrors().add( new DescrBuildError(
> >> > context.getParentDescr(),
> >> >
> >> > fieldConstraintDescr,
> >> > null,
> >> > "This is a
bug:
> >> > trying
> >> > to create a restriction for an empty restriction list for field
'" +
> >> > fieldConstraintDescr.getFieldName() + "' in the rule
'" +
> >> > context.getRule().getName() + "'" ) );
> >> > return null;
> >> > }
> >> >
> >> > Kind regards,
> >> >
> >> > Manuel Ortiz.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > 2011/12/22 Wolfgang Laun <wolfgang.laun(a)gmail.com>
> >> >>
> >> >> Now would you mind posting an example reproducing this error...
> >> >> -W
> >> >>
> >> >> On 22/12/2011, Manuel Ortiz <manuel.ortizramos(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
> >> >> > Dear Sirs:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I'm working on an application which writes a set of rules
using
> >> >> > information
> >> >> > which is stored in BDD tables. This information can be
'wrong'
> >> >> > concerning
> >> >> > rule compilation, and I expect that Drools reports the
> >> >> > corresponding
> >> >> > compilation errors.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I've found that PatternBuilder.createRestriction() fails
to
> >> >> > process
> >> >> > composite restrictions when one of the single restrictions
cannot
> >> >> > be
> >> >> > implemented. The problem is that although one of the sigle
> >> >> > restrictions
> >> >> > is
> >> >> > returned null, the composite restriction array is succesfully
> >> >> > returned,
> >> >> > one
> >> >> > of its elements being null, wich causes a
NullPointerException
> >> >> > when
> >> >> > the
> >> >> > composite restriction is processed in
> >> >> > PatternBuilder.build(AbstractCompositeConstraint version) to
> >> >> > obtain a
> >> >> > MultiRestrictionFieldConstraint object.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I would like to know if this bug has yet been reported and
fixed
> >> >> > in
> >> >> > some
> >> >> > Drools version beyond 5.1.1
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Thank you very much for your time.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Kind regards,
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Manuel Ortiz
> >> >> >
> >> >> _______________________________________________
> >> >> 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
> >> >
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
4542
days inactive
4543
days old
7 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
Manuel Ortiz -
Wolfgang Laun