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