[rules-dev] Drools syntax diagrams - redrawn

[Mauricio Salatino]

cool.. I think that it's a great idea to enforce it..
giving people to much choices to do the same always complicates things.

On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 8:46 PM, Mark Proctor <mproctor at codehaus.org> wrote:

>  yes, ? wasn't easy due to java and data munging would get messy as we map
> between things.
>
> So we just left it as any valid java identifier, but using the $ prefix as
> a coding convention make it easier to differentiate fieldnames and bindings
> Person( age : age )
> Person( age == age )
>
> The above looks a little confusing compared to:
> Person( $age : age )
> Person( age == $age )
>
> Davide wants to enforce the $ prefix so that parsing can be easier.
>
> Mark
>
> On 24/09/2010 00:31, Michael Neale wrote:
>
> The $name: Pattern thing I am convinced is to do with Mark's prior history
> of being abused by perl ;)
>
>  But the real reason is we wanted to use ?name: Pattern() - using "?" like
> the clips lineage of languages - but IIRC even ilog allows that. We wanted
> our labels to be compatible with java source code - where $variable is a
> valid name (although no one actually uses it) and ?name is not.
>
> So here we are ;)
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 12:29 AM, Greg Barton <greg_barton at yahoo.com>wrote:
>
>>  Yes, and I don't think we want to take readability cues from Perl. :)
>>
>> GreG
>>
>> On Sep 23, 2010, at 3:03, Wolfgang Laun <wolfgang.laun at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>  On 23 September 2010 09:31, Bruno Unna <bruno.unna at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> FWIW: in Perl, there are both operators as well (|| and 'or'). However,
>>> they are *not* exactly the same. Although they can be used in any context to
>>> render a boolean expression, their priority makes the difference. Taken from
>>> official documentation (http://bit.ly/dgw4GT):
>>>
>>>
>> Low precedence "and", "or", "xor" were introduced to permit "Perl poetry",
>> or, more seriously, to
>> permit control flow using a logical expression, especially after function
>> calls without parentheses.
>>    see Naples or die;  # same as: see(Napes) || die(); but not: see(Naples
>> || die() );
>>
>> No way this makes any sense in Drools.
>>
>> -W
>>
>>   Binary "or" returns the logical disjunction of the two surrounding
>>> expressions. It's equivalent to || except for the very low precedence. This
>>> makes it useful for control flow.
>>>
>>>
>>>  Nonetheless, it must be taken into account that the distinction makes
>>> sense for a Perl programmer. For a rules-writing guy (or girl) perhaps the
>>> distinction is extremely obscure.
>>>
>>>  Regards.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>    _______________________________________________
>> rules-dev mailing list
>> rules-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> rules-dev mailing list
>> rules-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Michael D Neale
> home: www.michaelneale.net
> blog: michaelneale.blogspot.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rules-dev mailing listrules-dev at lists.jboss.orghttps://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rules-dev mailing list
> rules-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
>
>


-- 
 - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
 - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
 - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar

 - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/rules-dev/attachments/20100923/09181abe/attachment.html