[rules-users] newbie question on "when" condition syntax

[mashup]

Ahhh I wondered about that, thanks. Again, now I see it, it makes complete
sense. This drools stuff is actually pretty damn good!

Richard

Chris Woodrow wrote:
> 
> You're right, if you want to do this with 2 facts, you'll need to do :
> 
>   $test : Test( $y : y )
>   Test(
> this == $test,
> x == ($y + 1) )
> 
> Chris
> 
> 2008/5/2 Raffi Khatchadourian <khatchad at cse.ohio-state.edu>:
> 
>> On Fri  2.May'08 at 10:05:20 +0100, Anstis, Michael (M.) wrote:
>>
>> > The "when" section matches fact (object) patterns, so your requirement
>> > could be written as:-
>> >
>> > when there is a Test Fact 'A' and another Test Fact 'B' where "the 'x'
>> > property of 'A'" equals "the 'y' property of fact 'B' plus 1" then.....
>> >
>> > This would become:-
>> >
>> > rule "Rule 1"
>> > when
>> >   Test( $y : y )
>> >   Test( x == ($y + 1) )
>> >
>>
>> Actually, please correct me if I am mistaken, but is this condition
>> correct? I believe that the original question is that for a single
>> instance of class Test t, fire the rule when t.x == t.y + 1 (where 't'
>> refers to the *same* instance of class Test). I believe the rule above
>> would match any instance of class Test whose x value is equal to the
>> value of the instance field y from *any* instance of class Test plus 1.
>> Does that make sense?
>> _______________________________________________
>> rules-users mailing list
>> rules-users at lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
> 
> 

-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/newbie-question-on-%22when%22-condition-syntax-tp17015309p17028019.html
Sent from the drools - user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.