4:52 a.m.
Hi
I'm struggling with the rule syntax. I took over this drools project of a
collegue who left the company and am struggling with a bug in our
application.
The following works:
rule "cbo2"
when
(or
Patient(sex == "F")
Patient(sex == "")
)
then
...
end
What doesn't work is the following:
rule "cbo"
when
(or
(or
Patient(sex == "F")
Patient(age > 2)
)
Patient(sex == "")
)
then
...
end
AND
rule "cbo"
when
(or
(or
Patient(sex == "F")
Patient(age > 2)
)
)
then
...
end
-------------------
Can someone please point me in the right direction or explain to me why I
get "no viable alternative at input 'or' with the last 2 examples?
Regards
Christophe
--
View this message in context:
http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/no-viable-alternative...
Sent from the Drools - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
5:09 a.m.
What are you actually trying to achieve?
It would probably be a lot cleaner and better just to write these as separate rules - one
for each case you want to consider.
Thomas
-----Original Message-----
From: rules-users-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org [mailto:rules-users-
bounces(a)lists.jboss.org] On Behalf Of chrbonte
Sent: 26 October 2010 10:52
To: rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
Subject: [rules-users] no viable alternative at input 'or'
Hi
I'm struggling with the rule syntax. I took over this drools project of a
collegue who left the company and am struggling with a bug in our
application.
The following works:
rule "cbo2"
when
(or
Patient(sex == "F")
Patient(sex == "")
)
then
...
end
What doesn't work is the following:
rule "cbo"
when
(or
(or
Patient(sex == "F")
Patient(age > 2)
)
Patient(sex == "")
)
then
...
end
AND
rule "cbo"
when
(or
(or
Patient(sex == "F")
Patient(age > 2)
)
)
then
...
end
-------------------
Can someone please point me in the right direction or explain to me why I
get "no viable alternative at input 'or' with the last 2 examples?
Regards
Christophe
--
View this message in context: http://drools-java-rules-
engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/no-viable-alternative-at-input-or-
tp1772702p1772702.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
**************************************************************************************
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
**************************************************************************************
5:56 a.m.
I tried a few permutations with 5.1.x
Nested infix appears to have a few problems, as you describe (although your
last example is incomplete); e.g.:-
rule "Unknown error while parsing. This is a bug. Please contact the
Development team."
when
(or
(
or Fact( ) Fact( )
)
Fact()
)
then
//Something
end
Non-nested infix looked OK:-
rule "compiles OK - 1"
when
(or Fact( ) Fact( ) Fact())
then
//Something
end
Post-fix appears OK:-
rule "compiles OK - 2"
when
(
Fact() or
Fact()
) or
Fact()
then
//Something
end
Based on my limited test it appears to be a bug and my advice would be to
raise a JIRA.
As a work around you can change your rules in post-fix notation.
With kind regards,
Mike
On 26 October 2010 11:09, Swindells, Thomas <TSwindells(a)nds.com> wrote:
What are you actually trying to achieve?
It would probably be a lot cleaner and better just to write these as
separate rules - one for each case you want to consider.
Thomas
> -----Original Message-----
> From: rules-users-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org [mailto:rules-users-
> bounces(a)lists.jboss.org] On Behalf Of chrbonte
> Sent: 26 October 2010 10:52
> To: rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
> Subject: [rules-users] no viable alternative at input 'or'
>
>
> Hi
>
> I'm struggling with the rule syntax. I took over this drools project of a
> collegue who left the company and am struggling with a bug in our
> application.
>
> The following works:
>
> rule "cbo2"
> when
> (or
> Patient(sex == "F")
> Patient(sex == "")
> )
> then
> ...
> end
>
> What doesn't work is the following:
>
> rule "cbo"
> when
> (or
> (or
> Patient(sex == "F")
> Patient(age > 2)
> )
> Patient(sex == "")
> )
> then
> ...
> end
>
> AND
>
> rule "cbo"
> when
> (or
> (or
> Patient(sex == "F")
> Patient(age > 2)
> )
> )
> then
> ...
> end
>
> -------------------
>
> Can someone please point me in the right direction or explain to me why I
> get "no viable alternative at input 'or' with the last 2 examples?
>
> Regards
> Christophe
> --
> View this message in context: http://drools-java-rules-
> engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/no-viable-alternative-at-input-or-
> tp1772702p1772702.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
**************************************************************************************
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
7:11 a.m.
Why not just have the following?
rule "cboFemale"
when
Patient(sex == "F")
then
...
end.
rule "cboNotBaby"
when
Patient(age > 2)
then
...
end.
rule "cboNoSex"
when
Patient(sex == "F")
then
...
end.
This has the advantage that rule auditing will identify which condition matches and means
that you can use the binding in the rule.
Alternatively you should be able to do
rule "cbo"
when
Patient(sex == "F" or sex == "" or age > 2)
then
...
end.
From: rules-users-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org [mailto:rules-users-bounces@lists.jboss.org] On
Behalf Of Michael Anstis
Sent: 26 October 2010 11:56
To: Rules Users List
Subject: Re: [rules-users] no viable alternative at input 'or'
I tried a few permutations with 5.1.x
Nested infix appears to have a few problems, as you describe (although your last example
is incomplete); e.g.:-
rule "Unknown error while parsing. This is a bug. Please contact the Development
team."
when
(or
(
or Fact( ) Fact( )
)
Fact()
)
then
//Something
end
Non-nested infix looked OK:-
rule "compiles OK - 1"
when
(or Fact( ) Fact( ) Fact())
then
//Something
end
Post-fix appears OK:-
rule "compiles OK - 2"
when
(
Fact() or
Fact()
) or
Fact()
then
//Something
end
Based on my limited test it appears to be a bug and my advice would be to raise a JIRA.
As a work around you can change your rules in post-fix notation.
With kind regards,
Mike
On 26 October 2010 11:09, Swindells, Thomas
<TSwindells@nds.com<mailto:TSwindells@nds.com>> wrote:
What are you actually trying to achieve?
It would probably be a lot cleaner and better just to write these as separate rules - one
for each case you want to consider.
Thomas
-----Original Message-----
From:
rules-users-bounces@lists.jboss.org<mailto:rules-users-bounces@lists.jboss.org>
[mailto:rules-users-<mailto:rules-users->
bounces@lists.jboss.org<mailto:bounces@lists.jboss.org>] On Behalf Of chrbonte
Sent: 26 October 2010 10:52
To: rules-users@lists.jboss.org<mailto:rules-users@lists.jboss.org>
Subject: [rules-users] no viable alternative at input 'or'
Hi
I'm struggling with the rule syntax. I took over this drools project of a
collegue who left the company and am struggling with a bug in our
application.
The following works:
rule "cbo2"
when
(or
Patient(sex == "F")
Patient(sex == "")
)
then
...
end
What doesn't work is the following:
rule "cbo"
when
(or
(or
Patient(sex == "F")
Patient(age > 2)
)
Patient(sex == "")
)
then
...
end
AND
rule "cbo"
when
(or
(or
Patient(sex == "F")
Patient(age > 2)
)
)
then
...
end
-------------------
Can someone please point me in the right direction or explain to me why I
get "no viable alternative at input 'or' with the last 2 examples?
Regards
Christophe
--
View this message in context: http://drools-java-rules-
engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/no-viable-alternative-at-input-or-<http://e...
tp1772702p1772702.html
Sent from the Drools - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users@lists.jboss.org<mailto:rules-users@lists.jboss.org>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
**************************************************************************************
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
________________________________
**************************************************************************************
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
**************************************************************************************
5175
days inactive
5175
days old
3 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
chrbonte -
Michael Anstis -
Swindells, Thomas