[rules-users] Implementing Refraction with Drools

[magaram]

Thanks for the feedback and the tip on the memory leak. I am using 5.4
distribution for my POC.

I agree with your comments. These features need to be thought thru
holistically and not piece meal.

My understanding is that the execution control semantics will not be
available till 6.x i.e. the repeatable semantics is not available in 5.4.

>From a use case perspective it would be nice to see these feature
implemented -

1. At a ruleset level and which can be injected into the engine at runtime
for all rules in the ruleset, with default semantics that popular commercial
engines support.
2. Rule level semantics that can be specified for specific rules. 


However from a Rule Architect perspective these are interesting and should
have appropriate controls in the API and the technical rule language i.e.
DRL to be able to control these.

My humble two cents :)



--
View this message in context: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Implementing-Refraction-with-Drools-tp4021705p4021757.html
Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.