Hi Michael,
Rule Flow; Great:
-----------------
Yes, a generic rule flow would be ideal.
..At a conceptual; how would one represent mutual exclusions? For some reason
I'm more comfortable looking at them as "Sets".
And also when we talk of flows, do we mean from a rule to another or it could
be a set of rules to another set? And, in the process flow it is possible to
skip an entire Set? Maybe you can see why I'm looking at it from a set point of
view. Where a set is a logical grouping, not necessarly in the same file.
..ok, I think I'll conclude here and give yr eye balls a rest! :) I'm sure you
guys have a lot to think about.
The idea of the questions is not to get answers, but to throw the idea in the
open for discussion. Being focussed on some things can make one loose
perspective of other things :o)
...One last thought regarding PERFORMANCE;...its a simple idea but I dont know
its worth. Often, rules may have inherent dependece (im not sayin we introduce
them, some can be free to live as they are).
Correct me i Im wrong, we are able to prepare the agenda based on Object type
node matching and the codition matching the facts...right?!
If the above is accurate, then when when we know that there is dependence on
other rules (rule flows can really help here) why cant that be taken as a
factor also? ==> Use a pre-condition to filer out matches?? My knowledge on
this is based on the documentation provided and hence I'm not confident. But I
did not see any thing like this mentioned and thought it was worth mentioning.
I'll try get into this code as soon as I have my bread n butter work regarding
earlier concerns done. :)
thanks a lot.
-Arjun
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list please visit:
http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
