say "there is a girl, and there
is not a boy whose age is 2 years less than the girl".
Any thoughts on this would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
-Chris West
___
rules-users mailing list
rules-users@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
ue() + 2 )
The reason is because "not" means you DON'T have a Person object
with that attributes (the boy), so you can't eval anything using "boyAge".
[]s
Edson
Chris West wrote:
> Does anyone know if there is a problem using a "not" comb
Hi,
Using version 3.0.6 of jboss rules, while retracting an object, I get the
following:
java.lang.NullPointerException
at org.drools.reteoo.beta.InstanceEqualConstrRightMemory.remove(Unknown
Source)
at org.drools.reteoo.BetaMemory.remove (Unknown Source)
at org.drools.reteoo.NotNode.re
t;[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Have you correctly implemented your equals and hashcode? Have you made
sure that the objects fields haven't changed between the assert and the
retract?
Mark
Chris West wrote:
Hi,
Using version 3.0.6 of jboss rules, while retracting an object, I g
cannot change during the
time the object is asserted into the working memory or you may have problems
(as hashcode and equals behaviors are defined as kind of "identity" of the
object).
[]s
Edson
2007/4/24, Chris West <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> Mark,
>
> The obj
od if
JBoss Rules handled the null and went on to shadow the object anyway, since
it is obviously not in the org.drools packages.
Now I'll continue trying to build a test case for my original problem.
Shall I enter a JIRA for this issue?
Thanks,
-Chris West
On 7/12/07, Chris West <[EMAIL
th maintenance in the case
of not using shadow facts.
I apologize if I'm not on the right track here. My only test case for my
problem is the entire application right now, so I cannot offer it for
discussion. Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
-Chris West
__
s namespace, you have to set exclusion lists.too. So
if your package has a null namespace it will still attempt to shadow it.
Mark
Chris West wrote:
OK, I just solved my own problem. My proxy had no package, since the jdk
based proxy is only in a package if it has at least 1 non public in
tenance
or minor release.
Can you present us your use case for asserting JDK proxies as facts?
Thanks,
[]s
Edson
2007/7/17, Chris West < [EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> Hello,
>
> With prior versions of JBoss Rules (3.0.5) I have been using JDK
> generated dynamic
ethods
for modifying my objects.
Thanks,
-Chris West
On 7/17/07, Mark Proctor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
If you do not have shadow facts you cannot use the update() method, it
will leave the working memory corrupted. Instead you must manage this
yourself, before you change any values o
I use my proxy, I manipulate
the value and keep the other rules from firing. Once the "real" change
comes back around, my own proxy stops "overriding" the value and the rules
engine never even sees the real change to the underlying object.
-Chris West
On 7/17/07, Edso
Is that still true if the equals() and hashcode() methods are only based on
the identity fields of the object (which cannot change)?
-Chris West
On 7/17/07, Mark Proctor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
you only need to use modifyRetract if the object is inserted. The reason
for this is
l let you
know.
Thanks,
Chris West
On 7/17/07, Edson Tirelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Chris,
I found and developed an intermediate solution that shall work for your
proxies.
If it is not possible to create a shadow fact for a class that is
asserted (because the class is final
d this be related to the change you
made to shadow proxies? If not, any ideas what might be occuring? I don't
have a simple test case for this problem.
Thanks,
-Chris West
On 7/18/07, Chris West <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Edson,
I downloaded and built the latest from the trunk of
tatus and vice-versa). So I'm wondering why the cast is
occuring, since it is not possible to work.
The unfortunate part is I cannot see into the class where the cast is
occurring, as it is a generated class created by drools.
-Chris West
On 7/18/07, Edson Tirelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> w
n, however.
Thanks,
-Chris West
On 7/18/07, Edson Tirelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Chris,
It is probably related. Can you isolate that in a self contained test
and send me? If it is proprietary code, you may send direct to me instead of
the list and I will not disclose. If
than Object.
Please take a look and let me know if I need to provide more info.
Thanks,
-Chris West
On 7/18/07, Edson Tirelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Chris,
What seems to be happening us that your SortieStatus interface has a
state attribute. Drools is trying to read this attr
Edson,
Thanks for incorporating this fix. The good news is that it fixes that
problem.
The bad news for me is that I'm now experiencing a different problem (where
my rules are not firing). I'll look into my new problem a little deeper.
Thanks again.
-Chris West
On 7/19/07, Eds
ange related to shadow proxies that went into 4.0.1?
Thanks,
-Chris West
___
rules-users mailing list
rules-users@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
u test with trunk, and submit a jira
> with a self contained test if you still have a problem
>
> Mark
> Chris West wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> After stumbling upon an issue with version 4.0.0 using "memberOf", I
> decided to upgrade to version 4.0.1. After upgrading, my
Edson,
Thanks for the snapshot build location. I just created a JIRA against
4.0.1illustrating the problem. I'll now test against the snapshot.
http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/JBRULES-1203
Thanks,
-Chris West
On 9/18/07, Edson Tirelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
&g
I tested the SNAPSHOT, and the problem exists. So my tests indicate that
the example attached to the JIRA runs properly on 4.0.0, does not work on
4.0.1, and does not work on the trunk SNAPSHOT.
-Chris
On 9/18/07, Chris West <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Edson,
>
> Thank
tEval1" in 4.0.1 and later versions. Although, at
> that time I missed the memberOf scenario. I know why it happens (shadow fact
> related), but now I need to figure out a way to fix it.
>
> May I ask you to open a ticket for that?
>
> Thanks,
> Edson
>
>
&g
s (shadow fact
> related), but now I need to figure out a way to fix it.
>
> May I ask you to open a ticket for that?
>
> Thanks,
> Edson
>
>
> 2007/9/18, Chris West <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> > All,
> >
> > I'm having a problem using
eval()s.
>
> I will fix 1204 asap.
>
> []s
> Edson
>
>
> 2007/9/18, Chris West <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> > Edson,
> >
> > So now my dilemma is that I cannot use 4.0.0 due to JBRULES-1204, but I
> > cannot use 4.0.1 or 4.
Hello,
Does anyone know why rule "GoodBye2" below does not compile, but rule
"GoodBye1" does compile using Drools 4.0.0? The only difference is the
"not". Shouldn't this be valid?
Thanks,
-Chris
package com.sample
import com.sample.DroolsTest.Message;
import com.sample.DroolsTest.Foo;
import
>
> Or does it not activate?
>
> --
> *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Chris West
> *Sent:* 04 October 2007 16:03
> *To:* Rules Users List
> *Subject:* [rules-users] using from with not
>
> Hello,
&g
== 10) from $foos)"?
>
> --
> *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Chris West
> *Sent:* 04 October 2007 16:59
> *To:* Rules Users List
> *Subject:* Re: [rules-users] using from with not
>
> It does not compile
on. Hope it is clearer now. But
> Michael got it right.
>
> []s
> Edson
>
> 2007/10/4, Anstis, Michael (M.) < [EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> > What if you try "not (Foo(id == 10) from $foos) "?
> >
> > ------
>
job/drools/lastSuccessfulBuild/artifact/trunk/target/
>
> The only changes we expect to do in it for the 4.0.2 release are IDE
> changes, so it is very close to what you will get when it is released.
>
> []s
> Edson
>
>
> 2007/10/4, Chris West < [EMAI
With 4.0.2, I know of no showstopper bugs. But until Edson gave me the
SNAPSHOT build today, I did not have 4.0.2.
Thanks,
-Chris
On 10/4/07, Mark Proctor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> we still have bugs which stop you upgrading?
>
> Mark
> Chris West wrote:
>
&
31 matches
Mail list logo
