[rules-users] Exclude certain rules

[Michael Anstis]

Just a random thought but would the declarative agenda (for 5.3?) provide
any help?

sent on the move

On 18 Nov 2011 21:23, "Jamie" <jshaw at llbean.com> wrote:

> I don't think you can reference a fact in the enabled condition.  There's
> also no way to get a reference to the current rule like you can in the RHS,
> which is why I had to hard code the name.
>
> Vincent, thanks for the comment out the inheritance.  I think that would
> work well for icechunk.  I had forgotten about that feature.  I've been
> searching for way to log when a rule was being evaluated and the best I've
> come up with is an eval() statement that writes a log message.  It feels
> like a hack and I didn't want to clutter all of my rules with it, but
> inheritance would let me centralize that logging if I create a base rule
> that all other rules extend from.  I'll have to look further into that.
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Exclude-certain-rules-tp3517185p3519741.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/20111118/fcec9634/attachment.html