[rules-users] Preventing re-evaluation on modification of 'output' fact

[Wolfgang Laun]

What you wrote sounds fine.

Having a sort of "root" object where List fields contain Odds and Ends, and
some rules rely on Odds (but not Ends) being updated and others that don't
it's not a good approach to make root a pattern in each rule.

It's like information hiding: A rule working with Odds should not have
access to Ends.

A frequently given advice is: insert List elements as facts and reason with
them if they represent independent entities. If necessary, locate siblings
via a "parent" pointer.

-W



On 15 November 2011 14:29, Jamie <jshaw at llbean.com> wrote:

> bump...
>
> Anyone have some thoughts on whether my revise approach makes sense?
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Preventing-re-evaluation-on-modification-of-output-fact-tp3455022p3509609.html
> Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20111115/5fe1314f/attachment.html