> Maybe I have misunderstood things, but I think this is a bit odd.
>
> If I have a method getName() in a java object and use that as a
> condition, like this:
> <cond>
> someObject.getName().equals("");
> </cond>
>
> and then modify that object in the actions of another rule, like this:
>
> <then>
> someObject.setName("foo");
> modifyObject(someObject);
> </then>
>
> then the truth of the empty string condition can be modified by
> inserting and removing System.out.println()'s in the getName()/setName()
> methods.
> Perhaps I'm going at this the wrong way, but this behaviour feels odd to
> me.
>
> Should I do things some other way or is this some kind of bug?
Not certain that I follow you, but what you're doing is legal.
I'm mostly confused when you speak of println()s, but I see
none in the example, and don't know how they could modify the
truth of anything.
Could you try to explain it again, and hopefully I can better
answer the question.
-bob
_______________________________________________
drools-interest mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/drools-interest
