On 03/12/2010 03:16, Zeke wrote:
I tried it. 5.1.1 also not works.
As this is using a nested accessor it would be an MVEL bug. I would create a failing test for MVEL and submit a bug:
"sec.fir.i == 2147483647"

The MVEL author will not fix things unless there is a jira with a failing test to prove it's a bug.

You can see lots of sample MVEL tests here:
http://www.java2s.com/Open-Source/Java-Document/Scripting/mvel/org/mvel/tests/main/CoreConfidenceTests.java.htm

If it was a direct accessor then it would be evaluate with the Drools evuluators, it might be good to check that those are ok too, or if they are bugged:
sec.i == 2147483647

Mark

Thanks!


2010/11/22 Mark Proctor <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>

    On 22/11/2010 01:03, Zeke wrote:
    Why int need be cast to BigInteger? 2147483647 is a valid int
    value. In normal java program, if a is a int variable, and assign
    its value to 2147483647, a == 2147483647 is true.
    Try this on 5.1, see if it works there first.

    Mark


    Thanks!


    2010/11/19 Mark Proctor <[email protected]
    <mailto:[email protected]>>

        On 19/11/2010 01:34, Zeke wrote:
        Can anyone help me?

        Thanks!


        On 16 November 2010 09:57, Zeke <[email protected]
        <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

            Hi,
              I'm using Drools 4.0.7. I find "==" operator does not
            work for big int value (like 2147483647). The condition
            is like "sec.fir.i == 2147483647". I attach my test
            code. With my simple testing, it seems that it does not
            work for comparsion with int constant from 1000000001 to
            2147483647. Is it a bug of drools? I have already tested
            long and BigInteger do not have this kind of problem.

        I suspect Drools 4.0.x did n't have big integer and big
        decimal coercion.

        Mark


            Thanks!



        _______________________________________________
        rules-users mailing list
        [email protected]  <mailto:[email protected]>
        https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users


        _______________________________________________
        rules-users mailing list
        [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
        https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users



    _______________________________________________
    rules-users mailing list
    [email protected]  <mailto:[email protected]>
    https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users


    _______________________________________________
    rules-users mailing list
    [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
    https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users



_______________________________________________
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