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