Well, that's certainly a workaround, but not a good solution. You have to do
the house keeping work of the intermediate fact, also Rule C may also depend
on Rule A if Rule B removes the intermediate fact then Rule C will fail to
execute. Another important factor is I want Rule B get fired immediately
after Rule A get fired, there is no guarantee that this will happen with
your workaround.
I really feel like to see this rule "aspect" programming feature get
implemented, that will greatly enhance the flexibility of Jess(for example I
want to add rule firing logging but I really don't want to touch my original
rule base).
From: "Robert Kildare" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: JESS: Is this feature available in Jess?
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 10:08:59 +1100
Traditionally,
rule A fires and as part of that, asserts fact (A_fired)
Rule B has as a condition on the LHS that fact (A_fired) must exist.
You have the option of retracting this fact on the RHS of B if so desired
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
_________________________________________________________________
Former Police Officer Paul GillespieÂs TAKE BACK THE INTERNET tips and
tricks, watch the video now http://safety.sympatico.msn.ca/
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
