[rules-users] Erratic behaviour of Drools

[Poissy.B]

Yes it does fire if I comment either of them, and I get the exact same
response.

I am using Drools 5.4.0.Final runtime.

Actually Products is the name property of an object of type
DataObjectReference (wich implements ItemAwareElementAdapter). The point of
providing the output was just to show you that the
List<ItemAwareElementAdapter> returned by both getGivenResources() and
getReceivedResources() is indeed not empty so the "exists" constraint
should have been matched.

Thanks!


On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 2:06 PM, Wolfgang Laun <wolfgang.laun at gmail.com>
wrote:

> See inline.
>
> On 15/06/2014, Poissy.B <poissy.b at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I am a little bit confused as I don't get what I am doing wrong. Here is
> my
> > rule:
> >
> > **************************
> > rule "Exchange Pattern"
> >     when
> >         $p2: ProcessAdapter()
> >         $mainProcess: ProcessAdapter( isMainProcess(), this!=$p2)
> >         MessageFlowAdapter ( fromProcess == $mainProcess, toProcess==$p2)
> >         MessageFlowAdapter ( fromProcess == $p2, toProcess==$mainProcess)
> >         exists ItemAwareElementAdapter( ) from
> > $mainProcess.getReceivedResources($p2)
> >         exists ItemAwareElementAdapter( ) from
> > $mainProcess.getGivenResources($p2)
> >     then
> >         System.out.println("** FOUND EXCHANGE PATTERN betwwen
> > "+$mainProcess.getParticipant().getName()+" AND
> > "+$p2.getParticipant().getName());
> >         System.out.println("Given:
> >
> "+$mainProcess.getGivenResources($p2)+$mainProcess.getGivenResources($p2).size());
> >         System.out.println("Received:
> >
> "+$mainProcess.getReceivedResources($p2)+$mainProcess.getReceivedResources($p2).size());
> >         System.out.println("Intersection:
> >
> "+$mainProcess.intersectGivenAndReceivedResourcesWithProcess($p2)+$mainProcess.intersectGivenAndReceivedResourcesWithProcess($p2).size());
> > end
> > **************************
> >
> > This rule is never fired, although I know it should.
> >
> > When I comment out the ONE OF the two "exists" constraints, I get this
> > output:
>
> Does the rule fire when you comment out either "exists" conditional
> element,
> i.e., it doesn't matter which one is removed?
>
> Which Drools version are you using?
>
> -W
>
> >
> > **************************
> > ** FOUND EXCHANGE PATTERN betwwen Amazon AND Ship.Comp.
> > Given: [Products (ID:DataObjectReference_2)]1
> > Received: [Products (ID:DataObjectRefeference_GEN7)]1
> > Intersection: [Products (ID:DataObject_2)]1
> > **************************
>
> I can't say that a display of fact type "Products" is clearly indicating
> the
> presence of an ItemAwareElementAdapter. That said, the rule shouldn't
> fire even with a single "exists", so I assume this is an interface
> implemented
> by Products.
>
> >
> > >From the output you can see that the rule should have been fired with
> the
> > two "exists" constrains as both conditions are met, but it doesn't.
> > I am kind of new to Drools so I may be doing an horrible mistake but
> google
> > haven't been my friend so far. Any help will be very appreciated!
> >
> > Thanks.
> > Anis
> >
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20140615/aae1b600/attachment-0001.html