9:19 p.m.
Hi -
I'm upgrading a large base of rules from 3.x to 4.0.7. However there
seem to be a few semantic differences. I have rules like the below in a
few places:
rule "All items should have a unique external id"
when
new_item : Item( exId : externalId )
old_item : Item( externalId == exId )
then
LOG.warn( "DUPE Detected: new:" + new_item + " old:" +
old_item );
retract( new_item );
end
And this all worked fine because 3.x would never assign the same object
to both new_item and old_item. I know my new/old seem arbitary - but I'm
just getting down to the minimal reproducing case. 4.x now will assign
one instance of an object to both new_item and old_item. Is there any
way to disable this behaviour?
thanks,
-Tom
5:05 a.m.
You can 'disable' this by *explicitly* specifying not to assign the same
object like this:$n : new_item : Item( exId : externalId )
old_item : Item( this != $n, externalId == exId )
this relies on equals/hashCode method, if you need to use object identities:
$n : new_item : Item( exId : externalId )
$o : old_item : Item( eval($o != $n), externalId == exId )
On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 3:19 AM, Knych, Thomas <thomas.knych(a)citi.com>wrote:
Hi -
I'm upgrading a large base of rules from 3.x to 4.0.7. However there
seem to be a few semantic differences. I have rules like the below in a
few places:
rule "All items should have a unique external id"
when
new_item : Item( exId : externalId )
old_item : Item( externalId == exId )
then
LOG.warn( "DUPE Detected: new:" + new_item + " old:"
+
old_item );
retract( new_item );
end
And this all worked fine because 3.x would never assign the same object
to both new_item and old_item. I know my new/old seem arbitary - but I'm
just getting down to the minimal reproducing case. 4.x now will assign
one instance of an object to both new_item and old_item. Is there any
way to disable this behaviour?
thanks,
-Tom
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
8:02 a.m.
Following API call (or equivalent property conf) will make Drools 4
behave like Drools 3.
RuleBaseConfiguration.setRemoveIdentities( true );
[]s
Edson
2008/11/12 Knych, Thomas <thomas.knych(a)citi.com>
Hi -
I'm upgrading a large base of rules from 3.x to 4.0.7. However there
seem to be a few semantic differences. I have rules like the below in a
few places:
rule "All items should have a unique external id"
when
new_item : Item( exId : externalId )
old_item : Item( externalId == exId )
then
LOG.warn( "DUPE Detected: new:" + new_item + " old:"
+
old_item );
retract( new_item );
end
And this all worked fine because 3.x would never assign the same object
to both new_item and old_item. I know my new/old seem arbitary - but I'm
just getting down to the minimal reproducing case. 4.x now will assign
one instance of an object to both new_item and old_item. Is there any
way to disable this behaviour?
thanks,
-Tom
_______________________________________________
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, a division of Red Hat @ www.jboss.com
5940
days inactive
5940
days old
2 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Edson Tirelli -
Knych, Thomas -
Michal Bali