1:13 a.m.
I have a scenario like below
Rule a
When
! (
(aaa == “bbb”) &&
(bbb == “aaa”)
)
Then
// do smth
End
I’m looking for an operator to reverse the evaluation result of the
expression in the brackets. Is this possible
--
View this message in context:
http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/not-operation-available-in-drools-tp401...
Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
1:38 a.m.
Read about the "Conditional Element not" in the Drools Expert manual.
You'll also need to learn about the "Conditional Element or".
-W
On 14/06/2012, learner <anandbabu6545(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
I have a scenario like below
Rule a
When
! (
(aaa == “bbb”) &&
(bbb == “aaa”)
)
Then
// do smth
End
I’m looking for an operator to reverse the evaluation result of the
expression in the brackets. Is this possible
--
View this message in context:
http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/not-operation-available-in-drools-tp401...
Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
1:40 a.m.
Hello,
you can use not like this
Rule a
When
not( (aaa == “bbb”) && (bbb == “aaa”) )
Then
// do smth
End
--
View this message in context:
http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/not-operation-available-in-drools-tp401...
Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
1:47 a.m.
Are the two conditions constraints inside the same pattern or two different
patterns?
In the former case, DeMorgan's laws also apply:
( a != "x") || ( b != "y" )
and you should anyway be able to use free-form boolean expressions inside a
pattern,
provided that you use one of the latest versions.
Otherwise (two patterns), see the previous posts.
Best,
Davide
--
View this message in context:
http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/not-operation-available-in-drools-tp401...
Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
2:22 a.m.
Sotty,
You want to be careful with applying De Morgan's laws indiscriminately
when terms aren't plain boolean expressions.
Even the simpler
Foo( a != x ) and Foo( b != y )
is not equivalent to
Foo( a != x && b != y )
-W
On 14/06/2012, Davide Sottara <dsotty(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Are the two conditions constraints inside the same pattern or two
different
patterns?
In the former case, DeMorgan's laws also apply:
( a != "x") || ( b != "y" )
and you should anyway be able to use free-form boolean expressions inside a
pattern,
provided that you use one of the latest versions.
Otherwise (two patterns), see the previous posts.
Best,
Davide
--
View this message in context:
http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/not-operation-available-in-drools-tp401...
Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
2:33 a.m.
Wolfgang and learner,
sorry for not stressing it clearly enough.
My suggestion was assuming that the constraints are inside the same pattern,
otherwise it's a different story...
From the posted DRL-like snippet, it's not clear whether it's
a single
pattern or two.
--
View this message in context:
http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/not-operation-available-in-drools-tp401...
Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
4371
days inactive
4371
days old
5 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
Davide Sottara -
learner -
pratibhapandey -
Wolfgang Laun