10:35 a.m.
Or do the check for both parts in both rules , or use inheritance, but the
easiest way would probably be to just have it return null if the number
isn't valid - at least if you are just doing in comparisons.
How do I use inheritance in Drools ?
------------------------------
*From:* "Swindells, Thomas" <TSwindells(a)nds.com>
*To:* Rules Users List <rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org>
*Sent:* Tuesday, December 6, 2011 11:15 AM
*Subject:* Re: [rules-users] Salience & activation-group
Thanks for your quick response, but I am still confused.
An activation-group assures that only one rule in the group will fire (an
XOR
group)
Salience controls the order of evaluation
No salience controls the order of the
activations firing.
There is no ordering of evaluating rules because rules aren't evaluated.
Instead the rules clauses are transposed into a RETE graph which evaluates
each clause as the necessary data is available.
If two rules share a clause then they may share a node in the RETE graph.
The regular expression test has the higher salience and will trigger
if
it is a bad
number ... so why is the other rule even being tested?
The RETE
graph is evaluated as deeply as possible in order to produce the
current list of possible activations.
The activations are then sorted by salience and filtered by agenda-group.
The top of the list is taken and fired.
If any other pending activations have the same activation-group those
pending activations are then removed.
(It's a lot more complicated than that as you have things such as lock on
active, no-loop, etc but it hopefully
makes it make a little more sense.
In the mean time I will re-write the underWritingClassAsInt method to deal
with a bad number ... but this seems wrong to me.
Or do the check for both parts in
both rules , or use inheritance, but the
easiest way would probably be to just have it return null if the number
isn't valid - at least if you are just doing in comparisons.
Thomas
**************************************************************************************
This message is confidential and intended only for the addressee. If you
have received this message in error, please immediately notify the
postmaster(a)nds.com and delete it from your system as well as any copies.
The content of e-mails as well as traffic data may be monitored by NDS for
employment and security purposes. To protect the environment please do not
print this e-mail unless necessary.
NDS Limited. Registered Office: One London Road, Staines, Middlesex, TW18
4EX, United Kingdom. A company registered in England and Wales. Registered
no. 3080780. VAT no. GB 603 8808 40-00
**************************************************************************************
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
10:51 a.m.
New subject: Salience & activation-group
Good question, not sure it is documented properly at the moment, I think it is the extends
keyword, but you can't easily use it anyway as you want the inverse of the other rule
(regex doesn't match) rather than the regex does match.
Thomas
From: rules-users-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org [mailto:rules-users-bounces@lists.jboss.org] On
Behalf Of Java Bean
Sent: 06 December 2011 16:35
To: Rules Users List
Subject: Re: [rules-users] Salience & activation-group
Or do the check for both parts in both rules , or use inheritance, but the easiest way
would probably be to just have it return null if the number isn't valid - at least if
you are just doing in comparisons.
How do I use inheritance in Drools ?
________________________________
From: "Swindells, Thomas"
<TSwindells@nds.com<mailto:TSwindells@nds.com>>
To: Rules Users List
<rules-users@lists.jboss.org<mailto:rules-users@lists.jboss.org>>
Sent: Tuesday, December 6, 2011 11:15 AM
Subject: Re: [rules-users] Salience & activation-group
Thanks for your quick response, but I am still confused.
An activation-group assures that only one rule in the group will fire (an XOR
group)
Salience controls the order of evaluation
No salience controls the order of the
activations firing.
There is no ordering of evaluating rules because rules aren't evaluated.
Instead the rules clauses are transposed into a RETE graph which evaluates each clause as
the necessary data is available.
If two rules share a clause then they may share a node in the RETE graph.
The regular expression test has the higher salience and will trigger
if it is a bad
number ... so why is the other rule even being tested?
The RETE graph is evaluated
as deeply as possible in order to produce the current list of possible activations.
The activations are then sorted by salience and filtered by agenda-group. The top of the
list is taken and fired.
If any other pending activations have the same activation-group those pending activations
are then removed.
(It's a lot more complicated than that as you have things such as lock on active,
no-loop, etc but it hopefully
makes it make a little more sense.
In the mean time I will re-write the underWritingClassAsInt method to deal
with a bad number ... but this seems wrong to me.
Or do the check for both parts in
both rules , or use inheritance, but the easiest way would probably be to just have it
return null if the number isn't valid - at least if you are just doing in
comparisons.
Thomas
**************************************************************************************
This message is confidential and intended only for the addressee. If you have received
this message in error, please immediately notify the
postmaster@nds.com<mailto:postmaster@nds.com> and delete it from your system as well
as any copies. The content of e-mails as well as traffic data may be monitored by NDS for
employment and security purposes. To protect the environment please do not print this
e-mail unless necessary.
NDS Limited. Registered Office: One London Road, Staines, Middlesex, TW18 4EX, United
Kingdom. A company registered in England and Wales. Registered no. 3080780. VAT no. GB 603
8808 40-00
**************************************************************************************
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users@lists.jboss.org<mailto:rules-users@lists.jboss.org>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
4739
days inactive
4739
days old
1 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
Java Bean -
Swindells, Thomas