ge0ffrey wrote > In OptaPlanner's architecture current philosophy, this is not legal: > a value range should be stable for each variable (of each entity) during > solving. > This not guaranteed to work (and it is guaranteed not to work if you do > phase caching of moves: > it will invalidly exclude part of the search space).
So if I understand you correctly phase caching moves is the way to go? ge0ffrey wrote > If it does work for you, I am interested to know more about this - so I > can consider to make this approach legal. It is working for me, to give you a better impression of my approach i added an image of my "planning classdiagram". <http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/file/n4029484/Planning_class_diagram.png> Observation contains 2 annotated planningVariables getScheduleBlock() and getPeriod(). in the getPeriod() function it checks if the scheduleBlock is not null, if so it uses scheduleBlock.getPlanningsPeriods() function to return a list of periods. If have any more questions feel free to ask, we are all working to make OptaPlanner better. I can even send you a zip of my current code if you are interested. -- View this message in context: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/rules-users-Drools-Planner-what-if-possible-values-of-a-PlanningVariable-are-dependent-of-another-on-tp4021175p4029484.html Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ rules-users mailing list rules-users@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
