Haaaaa!!! :)
I knew there would be a use case for a constraint negative operator
(not/!)!!
Sorry, it is not available in 4.0 but you can open a feature request and
I may add it to the next release! :)
Anyway, there are other ways. Just to make sure I understand your case,
can you please state your rules in plain English? I think there may be
easier ways to express them then the way you showed bellow.
[]s
Edson
2007/7/25, Yuri de Wit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
I have a case where I need to negate only part of the predicates.
RULE1
when:
c1 : Child()
c2 : Child(hashCode < c1.hashCode, prop1==c1.prop1, ... propN==c1.propN)
then:
insert(new Parent(c1, c2));
RULE2
when
p:Parent()
c1:Child(this memberOf p)
not Child(this memberOd p, prop1==c1.prop1, ...propN==c1.propN)
then
retract(p);
While in rule1 I use a matching criteria to group c1 and c2, in rule2
I want to use the inverse of the same exact criteria to ungroup them.
I dont care which propN no longer holds, as long as the any of the
propN no longer holds. The problem is that I still need the "positive"
this memberOf p. How to solve this problem?
RULE2
when
p:Parent()
c1:Child(this memberOf p)
Child(
this memberOd p,
not(prop1==c1.prop1, ...propN==c1.propN)
)
then
retract(p);
(afaik, not supported)
any ideas?
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
--
Edson Tirelli
Software Engineer - JBoss Rules Core Developer
Office: +55 11 3529-6000
Mobile: +55 11 9287-5646
JBoss, a division of Red Hat @ www.jboss.com
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
