On 31/01/2013, Mario Fusco wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> after a (quite long) discussion with Mark, Edson and Michael we realized
> that, to support the guided editor roundtrip without dropping our current
> DSL features, we need a new format allowing to mix plain DRL and DSL
> sentences but delimiting the
Hi all,
after a (quite long) discussion with Mark, Edson and Michael we realized
that, to support the guided editor roundtrip without dropping our current
DSL features, we need a new format allowing to mix plain DRL and DSL
sentences but delimiting these last ones in a clear (and easy to recognize
Personally, I think they should remain until the replacement is complete
and we can provide a migration path from one to the other.
The Guvnor community has a reasonably volume of emails relating to use of
DSLs within Guvnor and to simply strip out would, in my opinion, leave a
chasm for many user
Drools has been backwards compatible since 2006.
We'll provide migration paths, but we cannot guarantee backwards computability
indefinitely.
For instance in the case of DSLs, if we were to drop them, we could provide a
migrate script that rendered them all to pure drl (without any remaining DS
I value source code compatibility much higher than a guided editor. We do
all out rules editing in a plain text editor.
But we absolutely need the certainty that we can compile and run our
existing mortgage scoring rules for our mission-critical system with the
next major version of drools.
After
Providing a generic guided editor for unrestrained DSL definitions with
the option of revamping these definitions while maintaining the DRLs
is probably theoretically impossible, at least based on the DSL-to-DRL
translation process as it is currently implemented. Just consider a
mapping of two diff
On 29/01/2013, Mark Proctor wrote:
> One of the reasons this came up was due to round tripping from the guided
> editor to drl text format. This is so the guided editor does not use it's
> own proprietary xml format, but instead uses the .drl directly.
>
> Round tripping DRL is not so hard. Round
Btw the other reasons it comes up is tooling, in guvnor. People want to be able
to change their DSLs, and have the guided editors updated to reflect this,
without having to update each DSL manually. And then their is the request for
nested, scoped and related DSL fragments.
Mark
On 29 Jan 201
One of the reasons this came up was due to round tripping from the guided
editor to drl text format. This is so the guided editor does not use it's own
proprietary xml format, but instead uses the .drl directly.
Round tripping DRL is not so hard. Round tripping DSLs is much harder, and I
suspec
Mark,
in my talk at RulesFest 2011 I've demonstrated that DSLs in their
current form are
indeed useful, perhaps not quite as easy to use as marketing hype
promises. The current DSL process exploits regular expressions in a
clever way, but this has limits. (Programming in something close to
natura
How would people feel if we removed DSLs from 6.0? There is no decision either
way, but I wanted to see if people liked or disliked the idea.
My reason for this is I don't believe DSLs in their current form, beyond demo
ware, are useful. They need a lot more work to turn them into guided
struc
11 matches
Mail list logo
