Wolfgang Laun wrote:
2009/11/10 Mark Proctor <mproc...@codehaus.org>:
Wolfgang Laun wrote:
It is, however, very desirable to be able to write LHS in a more
structured way, not being forced to either repeat CEs or create
additional facts establishing secondary properties (such as isAdult).
<result-type> property <name>( <fact-type> <name> ){ <expression> }
and use this in LHS the way we are used to
What you just described there is prolog "like" in nature, we have some ideas
around that. My BRF talk last week showed some ideas on how we can integrate
POSL. The are upsides and downsides to fact inferrence and query based
inferrence - hopefully we can provide both worlds :)
Mark
What I'd really like to have does not extend current LHS semantics and
shouldn't have any impact on rete and inference mechanisms. The "property"
I'm thinking of is a pure CE expression abstraction, without side
effects etc. If
necessary, it could be implemented by textual expansion. Possibly it might
favour compilation into rete but I've never looked into this topic.
And if a function calls a function and we allow multiple arguments and
return value? heh, the only thing you'll be missing then is unification
arguments ;) And then we have full prolog.
But I get the jist of what you are getting at. Wait till we get the
prolog style backward chaining done, then we can see what additional
work needs to be done to satisfy your requirements. Id be worried about
adding this in first, and the backward chaining after, in-case it stunts
anything.
Mark
-W
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
