[rules-users] Understanding "rule flow"

[Anstis, Michael (M.)]

Hi,

So 4.0M2 will have "rule flow" ("Ruleflow: when you absolutely
positively have to make something happen in the right order", Michael
Neale 12/03/2007) bundled with it.

This will be a terrific benefit to our user base who will struggle
untold issues trying to understand and write rules that should have no
order of precedence (they like the procedural "do A", "do B", "do C"
approach!). What I would like explained though is how ruleflow affects
the function of a RETE network and hence the overall performance of a
ruleset. I see from Kris Verlaenen's blog that the ruleflow definitions
are divorced from the rule definitions and therefore suspect (as proven
by a trawl through the code) that ruleflow works with the current
concepts of agenda, agenda groups and activation groups.

I can see from the source that RuleFlowGroups control what activations
are added to the Agenda but am uncertain of the relationship between
RuleFlowGroups and RuleFlow definitions and rules themselves.

Is it possible, time permitting ;-), that somebody with the relevant
knowledge could put a few words together to explain how RuleFlow works?

With kind regards,

Mike

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/rules-users/attachments/20070504/80b77bcf/attachment.html