I think Ryan Crumley wrote: [Charset iso-8859-1 unsupported, filtering to ASCII...] > I could use some help deciphering what exactly (watch out) is telling me. Can > someone shed some light? > > I have the following output: > > ==> Activation: BUNDLING::build-bundle : f-11, f-9,,,,
This line means "The facts f-11 and f-9, along with the absence of certain other facts, satisfy rule build-bundle." The trailing commas mean there are a bunch of 'not' conditional elements that are being satisfied. > ==> Activation: BUNDLING::build-bundle : f-11, f-10,,,, > <=> f-4 (MAIN::... a rule fired and changed something here) The "spaceship" (<=>) means that fact f-4 was modified. > <== Activation: BUNDLING::build-bundle : f-11, f-9,,,, This line means that build-bundle is no longer satisfied by facts f-11, f-9 and the same set of negated conditions. If 11 and 9 haven't changed, then what this means is that one of the 'not' CEs isn't satisfied anymore -- probably f-4 now matches one of them. > <== Activation: BUNDLING::build-bundle : f-11, f-10,,,, > > Which brings up a few questions for me: > 1. What does a 'Activation' > mean? It seems to mean that a rule is being considered and if all > the guards pass the rule will fire. Nope, that's not it. > However how much of a guard has to match before an 'Activation' can happen? All of them. A rule is activated when its left-hand-side matches completely. Since more than one rule can be activated simultaneously -- i.e., by a single fact being asserted -- some rules can be activated, but not yet fired. > In my case above my rule goes something like this: > (defrule BUNDLING::build-bundle > ?b <- (bundle (stuff ...)) > ?child <- (component (stuff ...)) > > [some more guards that dont use <-] > => > RHS > ) > > So it is pretty clear that from the Activation line jess has > identified f-11 to match ?b and f-9 to match ?child, but has it > considered any of the other guards at this point? Or does it > consider ?c and ?child being matched enough to activate the rule and > saves the evaluation of the rest of the guards for later? No, see above. Activation means everything matches. > > Also, in the Activation line what do the trailing empty commas mean? > Do these represent the rest of the guards in my rule that I don't > capture a fact in with <- ? No, they represent negated conditions -- patterns that are satisfied when no fact matches, so there's no fact-id to print there; hence the empty space between commas. > 2. Maybe this will be obvious once I understand exactly what it > means for a rule to be listed as activated, but what does the last > two lines in my output mean. Does it mean it evaluated the rest of > the guards in that rule and decided it couldn't fire? Or does it > mean something changed in f-11 and f-9,f-10 such that the rule no > longer matched? It means that f-4 changed, and so the rule is no longer satisfied, because one of the negated conditions is now matched. > Any feedback would be appreciated. > > Thanks, > ryan --------------------------------------------------------- Ernest Friedman-Hill Distributed Systems Research Phone: (925) 294-2154 Sandia National Labs FAX: (925) 294-2234 PO Box 969, MS 9012 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Livermore, CA 94550 http://herzberg.ca.sandia.gov -------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, send the words 'unsubscribe jess-users [EMAIL PROTECTED]' in the BODY of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED], NOT to the list (use your own address!) List problems? Notify [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------
