Opps, sorry. I didn't think I was implying that jess isn't threadsafe. Quite the opposite, my experience has been that jess is *more* threadsafe than my own code D-;
alan -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 9/5/2003 11:24 AM Subject: Re: JESS: Defrule ordering woes I think Alan Moore wrote: > > I've employed this pattern repeatedly and it works like a charm. Throw in a > FutureResult for good measure and you've got a fast, reliable, thread-safe > system. This is indeed a good way to get the grouping semantic we're talking about; I did want to point out that Jess is normally thread-safe anyway even if assertions and rule-firings happen in different threads (just in case anyone got a different impression from your message.) > > alan > --------------------------------------------------------- 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] -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
