[rules-users] timer and duration - and please not the PS!

[Wolfgang Laun]

Ooh, it seems Eclipse outwitted me once again. But I think I made it on the
2nd try...
Sorry
W

PS:
(1) A decision on the matter of DSL variables would be appreciated. I'm
currently
developing a non-trivial DSL, and learning a lot about what's needed for a
*real world *application. Most importantly, some means of structuring the
DSL definition, so that they can be applied distinctively to specific groups
of
rules. This reduces the risk of "ricochets" if you know what I mean.

I've thought about proposing an entirely new approach, based on DRL
syntactic
entities, i.e., the expansion of a DSL phrase must be a "medium level"
non-terminal
of the DRL language. But this certainly restricts phrase parameters to
terminals.
If it's too sophisticated, you end up with a parser/compiler almost as nasty
as ANTLR3.

(2) I haven't forgotten the spreadsheet fixes. There's another relic I
found: some of
the column keywords have single letter alternatives (e.g. "U" for "no-loop",
"X" for
"activation-group"). Should I retain them - they are NOT documented in
Expert.

Should I add timer(int:)? Duration is deprecated, I'll leave this in but it
ought to
be marked clearly as such in the documentation, at least.

Please advise - I  can live with everything - non of this is important for
my company,
but I want to get the fixes and additions out of my thinning hair ;-)





On 11 December 2010 00:00, Mark Proctor <mproctor at codehaus.org> wrote:

> On 10/12/2010 08:44, Wolfgang Laun wrote:
> > Done. There are two FIXME-tests at the end, one for timer() + not; the
> other one
> > demonstrating that drools.halt() from a rule with a timer() doesn't
> > terminate the
> > session - it also keeps firing. Notice that even with no timer() on
> > the "halt" rule
> > but with another rule having a periodic timer "overrules" the
> drools.halt().
> Did you commit? as I'm not seeing anything in trunk.
>
> http://fisheye.jboss.org/changelog/JBossRules/trunk/drools-compiler/src/test/java/org/drools/integrationtests/TimerAndCalendarTest.java?max=30&view=all
>
> Mark
> > -W
> >
> >
> > 2010/12/10 Mark Proctor<mproctor at codehaus.org>:
> >> On 09/12/2010 14:50, Wolfgang Laun wrote:
> >>
> >> I can confirm that the timer rule continues to fire
> >> - if the condition contains a not CE
> >> - even after the not CE should return false
> >>
> >> Repeating timer firing stops for "positive" CEs turning to false.
> >>
> >> sounds like a bug :(
> >>
> >> Wolfgang, could you commit your test to TimerAndCalendarTest. Take a
> look at
> >> the tests there and follow a similar format, generally when there is
> only
> >> one or two small rules we prefer to inline the text rather than
> externalise
> >> it in a file, see testIntervalTimer
> >>
> >> So that it doesn't break hudson add FIXME to the start of the rule name,
> >> such as
> >> FIXME_testTimerWithNot
> >>
> >> Ideally open a jira and when you commit the code put the jira id in the
> >> commit messgae along with the jira title and a message something like
> >> "adding failing unit test"
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >>
> >> Mark
> >>
> >> -W
> >>
> >>
> >> On 9 December 2010 15:06, OlliSee<o.roess at seeburger.de>  wrote:
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> unfortunately not working, either.
> >>>
> >>> Maybe it will help, if I describe the scenario more detailed.
> >>>
> >>> I have three A facts inserted at the beginning.
> >>> Then the rule fires the first time after 5 seconds for every A fact and
> >>> inserts the B events.
> >>> Then I retract ONE of the B events, but the rule keeps firing for EVERY
> A
> >>> fact, despite the B events remaining in the WorkingMemory.
> >>> --
> >>> View this message in context:
> >>>
> http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/timer-and-duration-tp2057403p2057831.html
> >>> Sent from the Drools - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> 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
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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
> >
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20101211/91f4aaf1/attachment.html