Re: [rules-users] Chained Rules
On 06/05/2010 08:37, miguel machado wrote: there is the 'extends' feature.. i guess that's what you're looking for. rule xyz ... end rule abc extends xyz... ... end it's been recently talked about in this forum. _ miguel and rule flow. Mark On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 10:46 AM, djb dbrownel...@hotmail.com mailto:dbrownel...@hotmail.com wrote: Hi all, I know there are some basic ways to chain rules together, by setting flags in consequences that are checked in the conditions of other rules... but in a large system based on rule templates, where thousands of rules are generated, it is not feasible to chain rules in this manner, especially when they are chained in a somewhat arbitrary fashion (eg. True if Rule 130 AND Rule 200 AND Rule 480 fire) has anyone had this situation before? would I need to execute this as a post-processing step? or, is there any design pattern that will allow rules to be chained, preferably in a manageable way? regards, Daniel -- View this message in context: http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/Chained-Rules-tp775491p775491.html Sent from the Drools - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ rules-users mailing list rules-users@lists.jboss.org mailto:rules-users@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users -- To understand what is recursion you must first understand recursion ___ 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
Re: [rules-users] Chained Rules
there is the 'extends' feature.. i guess that's what you're looking for. rule xyz ... end rule abc extends xyz... ... end it's been recently talked about in this forum. _ miguel On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 10:46 AM, djb dbrownel...@hotmail.com wrote: Hi all, I know there are some basic ways to chain rules together, by setting flags in consequences that are checked in the conditions of other rules... but in a large system based on rule templates, where thousands of rules are generated, it is not feasible to chain rules in this manner, especially when they are chained in a somewhat arbitrary fashion (eg. True if Rule 130 AND Rule 200 AND Rule 480 fire) has anyone had this situation before? would I need to execute this as a post-processing step? or, is there any design pattern that will allow rules to be chained, preferably in a manageable way? regards, Daniel -- View this message in context: http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/Chained-Rules-tp775491p775491.html Sent from the Drools - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ rules-users mailing list rules-users@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users -- To understand what is recursion you must first understand recursion ___ rules-users mailing list rules-users@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
[rules-users] Chained Rules
Hi all, I know there are some basic ways to chain rules together, by setting flags in consequences that are checked in the conditions of other rules... but in a large system based on rule templates, where thousands of rules are generated, it is not feasible to chain rules in this manner, especially when they are chained in a somewhat arbitrary fashion (eg. True if Rule 130 AND Rule 200 AND Rule 480 fire) has anyone had this situation before? would I need to execute this as a post-processing step? or, is there any design pattern that will allow rules to be chained, preferably in a manageable way? regards, Daniel -- View this message in context: http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/Chained-Rules-tp775491p775491.html Sent from the Drools - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ rules-users mailing list rules-users@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
