Nah, this was just to test the reported syntax problems with a variable
number of arguments.

And the mvel was what caused the original problem, since variable arguments
works fine with dialect Java. I put it in to assert another MVEL problem
and forgot to take it out for you.

Sorry for not creating a more intelligent test case ;-)
-W


On 8 March 2012 15:30, Mario Fusco <mario.fu...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Wolfgang,
>
> I think I have found a fix for the issue you reported. Anyway, it is not
> very clear to me what you originally wanted to achieve with this example
> since, by using my fix, the 2 rules cause an endless loop even if you used
> the no-loop flag because each one feeds the other. I think this is the
> correct behavior unless you don't annotate the MySet class with
> @PropertyReactive. Indeed I checked that making the class property specific
> allows you to avoid the infinite loop and the test terminates with the
> following 2 sets:
>
> [z, y, x]
> [two, one, three, four, z]
>
> Please confirm that what I am reporting corresponds with your expectations.
>
> I also noticed that, in the test you attached, you used the mvel dialect
> for the first rule and by doing that the drl compilation fails. At a first
> glance this is caused by a mvel bug, not supporting varargs in the
> constructor signature. I am going to give a look also to this problem.
>
> Mario
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rules-dev mailing list
> rules-dev@lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
>
>
_______________________________________________
rules-dev mailing list
rules-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev

Reply via email to