Le 02/06/2014 15:43, Mark Proctor a écrit :
> I thought clips did do disjunction normal form? in that all ‘or’s are removed
> from the body of the tree and moved to the root, thus rewriting the logic
> into separate rules? This docs shows an ‘or’ rule is the equivalent of
> disjunction normal form:
> http://www.csie.ntu.edu.tw/~sylee/courses/clips/bpg/node5.4.3.html
>
> We do soothing similar to above, and a few other things. This class applies
> all our logic transformations, you may add others:
> https://github.com/droolsjbpm/drools/blob/master/drools-core/src/main/java/org/drools/core/rule/LogicTransformer.java
>
> Mark
>
> On 2 Jun 2014, at 14:37, Mercier Jonathan <jmerc...@genoscope.cns.fr> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> We use Drools at this time to explore some possibilities. We have an old
>> system, clips based and with clips rules need to be wrote to a
>> disjunctive normal form because they are no internal processing to
>> transform user rule to a disjunctive normal form.
>> As Drools generate a graph (Phreak) i would like to know if this graph
>> try to represent rules as a disjunctive normal form ?
>> if not i would like to know if we should to use disjunctive normal form
>> to write rules ?
>>
>> It seem disjunctive normal form could allow to do some concurrent
>> computation, i would like to know if drools will use this feature?
>>
>> thanks
>>
>> Regards
>> _______________________________________________
>> rules-users mailing list
>> rules-users@lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users@lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
Thanks Mark simple and clear :-)
Did you you have somewhere a roadmap ?
to know:
- when nearly 6.0.2 will come
- when concurrent approach wil be add
Thanks
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
