I guess I've always spoken my mind in favour of a clean syntax, even if it means a little extra typing. I dislike expressions with internal bindings; the traditional binding at the start of an expression is sufficient.
Cheers Wolfgang On 18/02/2013, Edson Tirelli <ed.tire...@gmail.com> wrote: > Wolfgang, > > Thank you for reporting. Mario is fixing it. > > On a related note, for Drools 5, for backward compatibility, we still > allowed bindings in the middle of expressions. We were discussing if this > should be disallowed from Drools 6 forward? Things like: > > Person( $name : name == "Bob" || $alive : isAlive && ($age : age > 40 ) ) > > Things get quite complicated and a bit hard to read as expressions get > more complex. It also clashes with the ternary operator ?:. > > Any thoughts on retaining support for this kind of syntax or removing > it? > > Edson > > On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 7:45 AM, Wolfgang Laun > <wolfgang.l...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> Below is a self-contained DRL which should not compile because the sum >> isn't a boolean expression. (Note that omitting "$x:" results in the >> correct diagnostic "predicate ... must be a boolean".) >> >> declare Foo >> a: double >> b: double >> end >> >> rule what >> when >> $c: Foo( $x: a + b ) >> then >> System.out.println( "foo: " + $c ); >> end >> _______________________________________________ >> rules-dev mailing list >> rules-dev@lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev >> > > > > -- > Edson Tirelli > JBoss Drools Core Development > JBoss by Red Hat @ www.jboss.com > _______________________________________________ rules-dev mailing list rules-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
