thank you for taking the time to test this, Wolf.I have other tests with
the same syntax that have tested ok as well. It is puzzling. I will test
tomorrow with the mvel jar that I'm using. I went to the beta 6 mvel
because it compiles a lot faster for 5.2 but perhaps there are side effects.
Given your enum, this .drl
declare Step
id: String
status: Status
end
rule insertion
salience ( 10 )
when
then
Step step = new Step();
step.setId( "One" );
step.setStatus( Status.PENDING );
insert( step );
end
rule testPending
when
$step: Step( status == Status.PENDING )
##
I am seeing this exact error when I upgrade form 5.2.0.Final to 5.3.0.Final. I
had seen some other issues when upgrading from 5.2.0.M2 to 5.2.0.Final relating
to the use of interfaces and implementing objects in functions.
The KnowledgeBuilder is complaining about not being able to find a refer
5.2.0.Final
I am seeing some confusing behaviour in enum comparisons in LHS rule
conditions. I have an enum class, "Status" (full source below) that is an
attribute on several of our domain objects. I'm comparing the enum in
several ways, and the rule fires differently when I use syntax that AFA
Define FraudResultsDTO as a global. That way, you don't have to specify it in
the WHEN part merely for assigning a variable to it
- Original Message -
From: Jamie [js...@llbean.com]
Sent: 10/26/2011 09:24 AM MST
To: rules-users@lists.jboss.org
Subject: [rules-users] Preventing re-evalu
We're building a fraud detection application that uses rules to analyze
orders and the buyers and recipients on those orders. As rules fire, they
modify an 'output' fact, which is an object whose only intent is to record
the results as rules fire. It's not used in the LHS of any rules other than
Tnx. Ill give it a try.
--
View this message in context:
http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/dsl-and-metadata-rule-information-tp3454282p3454831.html
Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
rules-users mailing list
rules-u
Yes, I found this out a few minutes ago. You indeed need 2.1.0.drools4. My
mistake. Thanks!
--
View this message in context:
http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/drools-5-3-0-Final-Predicate-must-be-a-Boolean-expression-tp3454503p3454717.html
Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at
Why are you using mvel 2.1 beta 6 ?
I enforced this check on the 5.3.0.Final but in order to work it needs a fix
I did on mvel. This fix (together with many other) has been deployed in a
proper mvel release (2.1.0.drools4) especially made for this purpose. This
is also the mvel version referenced
There's a compatibility matrix in the introduction docs, but it's not
updated with the latest release.
Combine Drools 5.3.0.Final with jbpm 5.1.2.Final with Guvnor 5.3.0.Final.
Op 26-10-11 15:21, Melton, Michael P CTR SPAWARSYSCEN-ATLANTIC, 01200
schreef:
Is there a recommended version of jBPM
Anybody?
-- Forwarded message --
From: Damien Renier
All,
I’m trying to prepare some answers to questions of a customer
The client wish to execute some rules on dates which are not today.
The rule is:
1.
|
rule "TooYoung"
2.
|
date-expires "26-MAR-2013"
3.
|
d
You can't do this with [when] or [then] entries, but try [keyword]. It also
works with parameters.
For instance:
[keyword]precondition {title}=rule {title}\nsalience 100\nwhen
-W
On 26 October 2011 14:21, gcautiero wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm not able to find a way to define in my DSL a phrase to
I did a quick search in the mailing list, but couldn't find a related issue.
The following rule worked fine in 5.3.0.CR1 (and earlier)
...
when
$party : ImmutableParty(addresses == null || addresses.size() == 0)
then
...
ImmutableParty has a getter for addresses and addresses is a collectio
Thank you so much ge0ffrey.
It works now. That was indeed the case, I had a planning variable which had
no planning values when the planningValueRange was specified.
--
View this message in context:
http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/drools-planner-5-3-0-Final-cached-planning-values-tp3452270p34
That sounds like a bug, can you please open a JIRA and attach your example?
sent on the move
On 26 Oct 2011 14:10, "marta" wrote:
> Hi, I've a problem with Drools 5.1.1. I'm using a decision table to write
> my rules and I need to use more than 9 parameters in the same action, but
> something d
Is there a recommended version of jBPM to use in conjunction with Drools
5.3.0.Final? We are currently using jBPM 5.1.0.Final alongside Drools
5.2.0.Final, but I see in Nexus that jBPM has 5.1.1Final and 5.1.2.Final
releases and I'd like to only upgrade one time.
Thank you.
Hi,
I've a problem with Drools 5.1.1. I'm using a decision table to write my
rules and I need to use more than 9 parameters in the same action, but
something doesn't work. In fact the $10 parameter is interpreted by Drools
as the first parameter ($1) with 0 appended on queue.
Does exist a differen
Hello,
I'm not able to find a way to define in my DSL a phrase to add metadata for
a certain rule.
I'm interested to provide something that can help end user to add
data-effective metadata for some rule in the DSLR file.
--
View this message in context:
http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/dsl-and-
Even if you didn't set something properly, it's an issue that planner
crashes without a decent error message.
I created this issue:
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JBRULES-3265
It's during construction heuristics.
Apparently you got a planning entity which has a planning variable which
has n
Op 25-10-11 15:57, Guilherme Kunigami schreef:
I'm trying to upgrade from drools 5.2.0 to 5.3.0 and having some
difficulties with the planner benchmark.
I'd like to make a set of move factories common to all local search
solvers, by adding them to inheritedSolverBenchmark block. But it
seem
Op 25-10-11 21:30, arrehman schreef:
> Anywhere these dependencies are documented clearly?
The maven repository's (usable by maven, buildr, ivy and gradle) are the
single point of truth for the dependency list.
The dependencies differ from artifact to artifact. For examples
drools-core only ne
It's a online session?
We are very interesting.
Best Regards,
Tony(Baiyuan, Tang)
Insigma Hengtian Software Ltd.
(C) +86-13858148802
-Original Message-
From: rules-users-boun...@lists.jboss.org
[mailto:rules-users-boun...@lists.jboss.org] On Behalf Of Laurence Vignollet
Sent: 2011年10月26日
22 matches
Mail list logo
