[rules-users] "in" syntax breaking the Rete Tree

[Wolfgang Laun]

On 21/02/2014, droolster <quant.coder at gmail.com> wrote:
> @laune,
>
> I don't want to make this thread longer than it already is but...

You can always start a new one ;-)

>
> 1. If you don't trust the Drools Rete Viewer, why is it there in the plugin
> and why are Rete graphs displayed in the documentation? If it is not
> trustworthy, then it's misleading. (I'm assuming you are on the Drools dev.
> team).

It may help to understand beginners to obtain an inkling of the way a Rete
is built. I've never read or heard that it is a sort of "graphic dump" of
the harsh reality. (Digging through the intricacies of the various network
node classes might show you what I mean.) I'd say, it's an "educational toy".
(BTW: wrong assumption.)

>
> 2. I said in my post "one of the assurances...". We do have JUnit tests in
> place. But it was source of confusion that the Rete viewer was complaining
> that the graph was broken (in the properties tab, there was null for one of
> nodes)  but the rule's were evaluating fine. It's not exactly a glowing
> advert for Drools Expert is it?

Well, I've made my point. JUnit is OK, and there are other ways. - There
were other troubles that worried me much more than a NPE in a toy.

-W




>
>
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/in-operator-breaking-the-Rete-Tree-tp4028148p4028235.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
>