On Apr 9, 2007, at 9:13 PM, Jim Yates wrote:
I'm trying to build a rule that matches shadow facts using a Java
Bean template. I want to build the following logic:
(facilitycode != 'K' and faciltiycode!= 'S' and (amt > 7500 or amt
< -7500 or rvu < -500 or rvu > 500) )
OR ( (quantity < -10 or quantity > 10) and costctr in 403 111 702
189 489)
and (servicecode contains 100 and quantity > 1)
I've taken a stab at a re-write, but no guarantees. A few things
that might help:
1) 'or' and 'and' are not binary operators, because of the prefix
notation they can take multiple boolean expressions. I'd take
advantage of that (but doing that is optional).
2) 'test' is a conditional element (CE) for patterns; it's not a
function.
3) 'member$' can do the set membership 'in' that you were
accomplishing with the 'foreach' loop.
4) Verify that the facility code field is a symbol -- if it is a
string, put S and K in double quotes.
What follows *might* possibly be an accurate translation -- but it
was a pretty long expression -- so no guarantees :).
(defrule Jim_Rule "Jim Rule Comment"
(BatchInboundTransactions (inbound_id ?inId))
(BatchInboundTransactions (facilitycode ?facilitycode))
(BatchInboundTransactions (amount ?amount))
(BatchInboundTransactions (rvu ?rvu))
(BatchInboundTransactions (quantity ?quantity))
(BatchInboundTransactions (costctr ?costctr))
(BatchInboundTransactions (servicecode ?servicecode))
(test
(and
(neq ?facilitycode S)
(neq ?facilitycode K)
(or (< ?amount -7500) (> ?amount 7500)
(< ?rvu -500) (> ?rvu 500)
(< ?quantity -10) (> ?quantity 10)
(member$ ?costctr (create$ 403 111 702 189 489))) ; NOTE #1, NOTE #2
(str-index 100 ?servicecode)
(> ?quantity 1)))
=>
(add (new BatchWorkListErrors "New" ?inId 1)))
NOTE 1: In the original rule, it appeared that there was an 'and'
just before the foreach test (now a member$ call) that only had one
expression (so it wasn't needed).
NOTE 2: If the five numbers in the foreach are used elsewhere, you
might want to declare a defglobal for reuse.
This is part of an application that will let users define the
rules, 1 condition at a time. The rules will be written to disk
and read in at the start of the application. I'm wrapping the OR's
in a TEST because I only want to get back one match per rule.
I'm not sure its clear how the 'test' CE and 'or' phrases you have
accomplish this. Take a look at the 'exists' CE that Jess provides,
if you haven't already -- that might be just what you're looking for.
When I run with a quantity of 10, I get a Jess Exception "Undefined
function test". If I use quantity of 11 I get back one match.
'test isn't a function, it's a pattern. It should start a pattern on
the LHS. I suspect that a nested 'test' isn't reached due to the (> ?
quantity 10) check -- but when ?quantity is within [-10,10], Jess
needs to evaluate another part of a boolean expression and tries to
evaulate 'test' as a function, not a pattern.
Hope that helps,
- Mike
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
