Edson,
That certainly makes sense. However I'm fairly certain that in
referencing the inner class in rule definition, I always qualified it
with the outer class name, ie:
DataClass.AlternativeKey()
or
AnotherClass.AlternativeKey()
I appreciate your explaination of the "merge" process. Rather than have
you spend any more time on this, I'll try to put together a test case to
ensure I was seeing the behavior I thought I was seeing. I probably
won't get around to this until tonight or the weekend.
If I was mistaken, I'll let you (and the mailing list) know. If I was
not, would you like me to open a JIRA with the attached test case? I
would assume that if the inner classes contain the qualified name that
the engine should be able to handle that?
Thanks,
Eric
Edson Tirelli wrote:
Eric,
Thanks, I understand now.
What happens is that if both DRL files declare the same package
name, all their contents will be merged. It means that you would end up
with both imports in the same namespace:
import com.company.DataClass.AlternativeKey;
import com.company.AnotherClass.AlternativeKey;
And so the engine will raise an error saying that it does not know
which one you are refering to when you write simply:
AlternativeKey
I think the engine behavior is correct, since the idea of loading
two different files with the same name space into the same package
builder is to merge them, or even replace (update) that eventually have
the same name.
What do you think?
Edson
2007/7/26, Eric Miles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>:
Edson,
I have since changed my schema but here was my issue:
rule1.drl:
import com.company.DataClass.AlternativeKey;
import com.company.DataClass;
rule "Some rule"
when
DataClass.AlternativeKey(someParm == true)
then
...
end
Different drlf file:
rule2.drl
import com.company.AnotherClass.AlternativeKey;
import com.company.AnotherClass;
rule "Another rule"
when
AnotherClass.AlternativeKey(diffParm == 1)
then
...
end
This was the gist of what I was doing. The outer classes' names
were different, it was the INNER class of each of these classes that
had the same name. I was actually getting compile errors on the
import statements. Like I said, these rules worked fine if loaded
separately, but once I tried to put them all int he same rule base,
I was getting the import collision error. Later on this evening
(when I'm not at work), I'll try to put together a small test case
and upload it. In the meantime, you can look skim over this and let
me know if something jumps out at you.
Thanks,
Eric
On Thu, 2007-07-26 at 10:32 -0300, Edson Tirelli wrote:
Eric,
Not sure if I understood your problem, but if you have
multiple classes with the same name, and the only difference is
that they are inner classes of different classes, I guess what you
need to do is to fully qualify your class names in your rules...
rule xxx
when
my.package.MyClass.MyInnerClass( ... )
...
end
If this is not your problem, can you please show us an example
so we understand it better?
Edson
2007/7/25, Eric Miles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>:
Due to how JAXB treats anonymous inner complex types, I ended
up with a public static inner classes named AlternativeKey in
several of my data classes I have several rules written to
deal with each data class individually that all work ok.
However, when I attempt to put them all in the same rule base
(all belong to the same package), I get an import collision
exception on the AlternativeKey inner class. Depending on
where in the builder I add the resource depends on which
AlternativeKey the compiler bitches about (validity). I'm not
familiar with the source at all, so I'm unsure as to where to
look for this. However, this sounds like a bug to me? There
is an easy workaround for this as I I just don't use anonymous
types and define them in my schema explicitly. Just thought
I'd identify this as a possi ble issue.
Thanks,
Eric
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[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 <http://www.jboss.com>
--
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 <http://www.jboss.com>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
