ERGO.....

.....
Defining rules saturday night DOES make me mad!



:D



Next saturdays I will make sure to party, instead of defining Drules... ;-)



Massi

  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ha scritto nel messaggio news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

  Look at this....

  I have got a "ContractWrapper" fact inserted into WM.

  It wraps a "Contract" object and some "enums" fields.

  One of these fields is "upronto":

    public class ContractWrapper extends BaseOmPersistentWithAssignedId{

    Contract mycontract=null;


    ...

    Pronto upronto = null;

    ... 


    <getters and setters....>






    ...

    }



  "upronto" is an insance of a "Pronto" java enum:

    public enum Pronto {

    N,

    UNKNOWN,

    Y;

    }


  "Pronto" can be : (Y, N, UNKNOWN)

  Here is the rule which reasons over this enum:
  (ofcourse I have got a Request into WM as well)

  rule "ScorePronto"
  dialect "mvel"
  ruleflow-group "Scoring"
   when
       $r:Request( $mc:mainContract != null )
       $cw_p:ContractWrapper($c_w_p:mycontract == $mc, eval(upronto != 
Pronto.Y))
   then 
       System.out.println("Test Result: "+($cw_p.upronto == Pronto.Y))  
  end

  Any guesses for the output???

  Well....

  Test Result: true

  HOW COMES???????????????????

  I mean ... the test "eval(upronto != Pronto.Y)" returned "true".... It means 
that the rule
  engine sees upronto <> Pronto.Y!, doesn't it??!!!!

  So... why do I get "upronto == Pronto.Y" in the RHS????

  What the.........&$%%&()%%$/%£....sorry....but having these
  kind of problems during saturday night is not so pleaseant!  

  T-T

  I really hope you can help me with a  workaround to this issue.

  Bye

  Massi




------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  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

Reply via email to