Yes, Jess will handle that correctly. When test-folding was first released there was indeed a problem with this, but it's fixed now.

On Oct 22, 2007, at 11:17 AM, Shyamal Pandya1 wrote:

The manual says the following :

" In fact, starting with Jess 7.1, the functions in a test CE are simply
added to the previous pattern's tests."

Is this true even if the previous pattern is backchain-reactive? I've
read somewhere on this list that backchain-reactive patterns can only
contain  simple tests. Given this, can we have a condition like

(A (x ?x) (y ?y))
(test (> ?x ?y))

Where A is backchain-reactive?
If so, are there any limitations with respect to test and backward
chaining patterns?

Thanks,
Shyamal




-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Ernest Friedman-Hill
Sent: Friday, October 05, 2007 11:27 PM
To: jess-users@sandia.gov
Subject: JESS: Announcing Jess 7.1a3

Jess is the Rule Engine for Java Programmers.

We're pleased to announce the immediate availability of Jess 7.1a3 from

http://www.jessrules.com/download.shtml

This release includes some important bug fixes as well as some
exciting new features. In particular, Jess7.1a3 optimizes the "test"
CE as well as some uses of functions during pattern matching,
resulting in both memory and performance improvements. Jess 7.1a3
also introduces a new "dotted variable" notation for referring to
facts and their slots; this new notation leads to both clearer syntax
for humans, and easier code generation for rule processing tools.

We're recommending that everyone use this version for their
development work. It's highly compatible with Jess 7.0, passes all
the Jess 7.0 regression tests, and fixes some significant bugs from
that earlier  release.

 From the change log:

               Keyed storage bsaved/bloaded (thanks Henrique Lopes
               Cardoso.) Don't obfuscate ClassResearcher.Property in
               trial version (thanks Wolfgang Laun). DEFMODULE
               events. Dot notation in Java patterns. Fix bug in
               redefining templates which extend other templates. Fix
               logical bug (thanks Aaron Novstrup). Fix agenda bug
               (thanks Brian Rogosky.) Fix and/not bug (thanks Florian
               Fischer and Bob Kirby). Fold "test" CEs into preceding
pattern. Translate many 'eq', 'neq' funcalls into direct
               matches.

As usual, questions and comments can go to the list or to me at the
address below.


---------------------------------------------------------
Ernest Friedman-Hill
Informatics & Decision Sciences          Phone: (925) 294-2154
Sandia National Labs                FAX:   (925) 294-2234
PO Box 969, MS 9012                 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Livermore, CA 94550                 http://www.jessrules.com

--------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, send the words 'unsubscribe jess-users [EMAIL PROTECTED]'
in the BODY of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED], NOT to the list
(use your own address!) List problems? Notify
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, send the words 'unsubscribe jess-users [EMAIL PROTECTED]'
in the BODY of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED], NOT to the list
(use your own address!) List problems? Notify owner-jess- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------
Ernest Friedman-Hill
Informatics & Decision Sciences          Phone: (925) 294-2154
Sandia National Labs                FAX:   (925) 294-2234
PO Box 969, MS 9012                 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Livermore, CA 94550                 http://www.jessrules.com

--------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, send the words 'unsubscribe jess-users [EMAIL PROTECTED]'
in the BODY of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED], NOT to the list
(use your own address!) List problems? Notify [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to