I am thinking the same thing. Flow and guvnor questions also come through this list.
I 'll ask in the planner manual to put [planner] in front of your subject :) PS: I 'll also make a twitter hash tag: #drools-planner By the way, Micheal did you see my reply on this thread too, about the global Score refactor? With kind regards, Geoffrey De Smet Swindells, Thomas schreef: > I'd vote to keep it on here, the traffic isn't that high and people like me > can learn about what other features exist. Plus it makes searching for > answers so much easier. > > Thomas > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] [mailto:rules-users- >> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Michael Neale >> Sent: 08 January 2010 01:21 >> To: Rules Users List >> Subject: Re: [rules-users] Planner/solver - POSITIVE scoring... >> >> yeah that is it. >> >> BTW - is it ok to chat about planner here - is there enough interest >> to create a separate list for it if needed? (or is traffic low enough >> people aren't troubled?). >> >> On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 3:11 AM, Greg Barton <[email protected]> wrote: >>> So, basically what you're saying is, "The impact of a given negative soft >> constraint is reduced by the occurrence of another positive constraint." >>> If that's the case, the rule makes sense to me: total up the occurrences of >> the negative constraint, total up the occurrences of the positive constraint, >> and then combine them in a way that describes their relationship. >>> In this case, what the positive constraint "favors" is the reduction or >> elimination of the negative constraint, so subtracting the positive >> constraint >> makes sense. (A classic "interference pattern" situation.) >>> --- On Thu, 1/7/10, Michael Neale <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> From: Michael Neale <[email protected]> >>>> Subject: [rules-users] Planner/solver - POSITIVE scoring... >>>> To: "Rules Users List" <[email protected]>, "Geoffrey" >> <[email protected]> >>>> Date: Thursday, January 7, 2010, 12:23 AM >>>> Hi All - FYI I have been conversing >>>> with Geoffrey on basic >>>> solver/planner usage questions, but we are bring the >>>> discussion here >>>> in case others can benefit. >>>> >>>> So I am looking at using IntConstraintOccurrence, for >>>> scoring with >>>> weights, and HardAndSoftConstraintScoreCalculator. So I can >>>> see how >>>> NEGATIVE_HARD and NEGATIVE_SOFT scores would work, with >>>> appropriate >>>> accumulator rules doing that etc. >>>> >>>> What I am not sure about is ConstraintType.POSITIVE - so I >>>> want to use >>>> that to "favour" certain aspects of a solution. So would >>>> the correct >>>> way to use that to be to have rules that use a positive >>>> IntConstrainOccurrence, and then do something like: >>>> >>>> when >>>> $softTotal : Number() from >>>> accumulate( >>>> >>>> IntConstraintOccurrence(constraintType == >>>> ConstraintType.NEGATIVE_SOFT, $weight : weight), >>>> sum($weight) // >>>> Vote for >>>> http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/JBRULES-1075 >>>> ); >>>> $positiveTotal: Number() >>>> from accumulate( >>>> >>>> IntConstraintOccurrence(constraintType == >>>> ConstraintType.POSITIVE, $weight : weight), >>>> sum($weight) // >>>> Vote for >>>> http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/JBRULES-1075 >>>> ); >>>> >>>> then >>>> >>>> scoreCalculator.setSoftConstraintsBroken($softTotal.intValue() >>>> - $positiveTotal.intValue()); >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ?? it seems odd - I want to use POSITIVE but I am using it >>>> to reduce >>>> the soft constraints broken? The the higher the positive >>>> score, the >>>> less softConstraintsBroken property of the score calculator >>>> is set - >>>> that seems odd... or should I not use HardAndSoft if I am >>>> using >>>> POSITIVE and NEGATIVE scoring? >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Michael D Neale >>>> home: www.michaelneale.net >>>> blog: michaelneale.blogspot.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 >>> >> >> >> -- >> Michael D Neale >> home: www.michaelneale.net >> blog: michaelneale.blogspot.com >> >> _______________________________________________ >> rules-users mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users > > > ************************************************************************************** > This message is confidential and intended only for the addressee. If you have > received this message in error, please immediately notify the > [email protected] and delete it from your system as well as any copies. The > content of e-mails as well as traffic data may be monitored by NDS for > employment and security purposes. To protect the environment please do not > print this e-mail unless necessary. > > NDS Limited. Registered Office: One London Road, Staines, Middlesex, TW18 > 4EX, United Kingdom. A company registered in England and Wales. Registered > no. 3080780. VAT no. GB 603 8808 40-00 > ************************************************************************************** > > This message is confidential and intended only for the addressee. If you have > received this message in error, please immediately notify the > [email protected] and delete it from your system as well as any copies. The > content of e-mails as well as traffic data may be monitored by NDS for > employment and security purposes. > To protect the environment please do not print this e-mail unless necessary. > > An NDS Group Limited company. www.nds.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
