----- Original Message ----- From: "John Sheppard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > James, > you point out some very valid points. I know there is currently a project > ,by MS and I forget it's name, that will allow a translation from Java -> > C#. But I have my doubts as to the effectiveness of it. I need to get my > hands on it and run it through it's paces. As long as we don't bring J2EE > or EJB's into the picture it looks like a very straight forward port.
I don't think EJBs will make it into the rule engine per se, unless as a user plugin via reflection/introspection. (i.e. its just some bean a Java users adds to the rule base to do evaluate rules on). So long as you can port the reflection/introspection stuff I think you'll be fine. From: "bob mcwhirter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Compiled Rules --> Bad. Extensibility at runtime is *required*. Agreed, though for relatively static rule bases, turning rules into compiled code via some mechanism is a nice optimisation. I know of some users who like the idea of building dynamic rule bases, testing them out with production data then when they are happy they release them into production as a JAR. i.e. dynamic rules in development / system test and static (compiled to bytecode) rules in production. James _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ drools-interest mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/drools-interest
