A rule engine will reason upon all the facts that are in its working memory, no matter what facts are in there. Therefore, it can not natively know whether it has "enough" facts, neither does it (natively) know which facts are missing. Call fire all rules, the engines starts thinking and will stop thinking from the moment there are no more rules that are matching. Whether the "results" make sense or not... well, it actually doesn't care.
In theory, you should provide all necessary facts before calling the rule engine. I.e. add a task/step before calling the engine to collect all missing facts. In practice, you are able to "hack the philosophy", as the THEN part of a rule is pure JAVA code, you can pretty much do what you want and add a rule/rules that go after the required inputs (WHEN not veryImportantObject() THEN getMyVeryImportantObject();END Does this make sense to you? Regards, Frank rchemisa wrote: > > Ty so much for answering FrankVhh, > > I dont understand if you can stop the process (just wait) in the Rule Set > waiting to be inserted in the session some fact that makes the rules > associated conditions are met (the result of the conditions true) > > So, the "Rule Set" act as a Wait State but may outsource the rules in the > drl. > > Regards > -- View this message in context: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/RuleSet-RuleFlowGroup-tp3165058p3166451.html Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ rules-users mailing list rules-users@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
