[rules-users] new to Drools: modeling issues

[Michael Anstis]

Glad you're reading the documents - you'd be surprised how many people
asking questions do not!

You can put off DSL until you're happy your rules are working, off course -
in fact, IMO, it's easier to "debug" rules without the additional
abstraction.

You're first rule looks better - although I'd still be inclined to look at
no-loop rather than the check yourself (what if you need the new value to be
dynamic; i.e. not just statically "value"? Your rules would become
cumbersome).

The second rule does not associate StringHolder to any particular Child
instance (although easily added); so you'd get the cross-product of
StringHolders and Child facts; not I suspect what you'd want.

Cheers,

Mike

On 6 December 2010 10:36, Gabor Szokoli <szocske at gmail.com> wrote:

> Thanks for the instant response!
>
> 2010/12/6 Michael Anstis <michael.anstis at gmail.com>:
> > The drools-expert documentation would be a good starting point; otherwise
> > Wikipedia has a good overview of the RETE algorithm (all be it Drools has
> > its own extensions).
>
> I'm reading the documentation thoroughly of course, but it seems to be
> centered about using the system and writing rules. Which is how it
> should be, don't get me wrong :-)
> I'm just hoping for some spoilers like "Section X will detail how java
> object are mapped to WMEs."
>
> > Regarding your specifics; you could look into using a DSL for the domain
> > experts rather than pure DRL. Also, the no-loop attribute could\should
> help
> > with your looping fear (have a look in the documentation).
>
> Can I put off the DSL part for later, and consider it just an extra
> layer of rule file parsing for now?
> Do I lose the graphical on-line editor features of Guvnor (which I
> admittedly have not looked into yet, just salivated over some
> screenshots.) if I make a DSL?
>
> > A rather disturbing example you choose to show in your email; I think I
> > prefer the "Cheese" centric types in the documentation :)
>
> Other than the attention-whoring double take in nomenclature, does
> that rule pattern look OK?
>
> I'll stick with cheese in the future :-)
>
>
> Thanks Again!
>
> Gabor Szokoli
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/rules-users/attachments/20101206/5acad0f7/attachment.html