Great thanks! And yes, these rules are just simple audits so they don't do any asserting.
Quick follow up, how does this work with back-chaining. We don't have any at the moment in this set of rules but may soon. Would i be able to do the same thing for a backward reactive rule ? On Tue, 23 May 2006 10:21:04 -0700 (PDT), ejfried wrote > I think erich.oliphant wrote: > [Charset iso-8859-1 unsupported, filtering to ASCII...] > > Hi, > > I have an interesting situation. I've a set of business rules we developed > > that were currently using 'normally'. Defrules, toss in facts/definstances > > and run. These rules update some domain objects when they fire. > > > > We now have a situation where we need to use a subset of the same rules in a > > different context. 1) the caller only needs to know if a rule fired, so > > different RHS behavior 2) the caller needs to be able to specify which rules > > should be evaluated. So currently the .clp has say rule1 - rule20. In this > > scenario the caller needs to add some facts, and only have say rule2 and > > rule7 > > evaluated against the facts, and the caller only needs to know if their LHS' > > matched at all, not have the RHS action take place. > > > > Any ideas? Since this seems to of course fly in the face of the standard > > usage pattern, I am having some difficulty. > > Since you don't want the rules to fire, one thing you can do is just > call Rete.listActivations() and iterate over all the Activation > objects, looking at each one to find out if the rules of interest are > active. If you're using multiple modules, then you'll need to check > each module separately. > > Now, this assumes there are no multi-step operations -- i.e., it's > not the case that a rule fires, and asserts a fact, which activates > another rule, and you're interested in that second rule. If that's > the case, then the premise about the rules not firing is flawed. > > --------------------------------------------------------- > Ernest Friedman-Hill > Advanced Software 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
