One might very well argue that the automatic definition of a template
for ordered facts, as in
(defrule r (t 1 ?two) => ... )
or any fact definition is somewhat dangerous since it might cover up
anything from a simple typos to a major syntax error. Adding the option
of suppressing the auto-defi
(locality-value "wembley")
> (street-value "grantham"))
>FIRE 3 MAIN::locality-street f-12, f-2, f-6,,
> ==> f-18 (MAIN::locality-street-match (locality-value "wembley")
> (street-value "marlow"))
>FIRE 4 MAIN::locality-street f-11, f-1, f-7,,
> ==
> f-19 (MAIN::locality-street-match (locality-value "south perth")
(street-value "coode"))
<== Focus MAIN
4
Bob Orchard
National Research Council Canada Conseil national de recherches Canada
Institute for Information Technology Institut de technologie de l'info
I would help to pretty-print your rules. If you had, you could see that you
have (eq ?ov ?locality) (eq ?wv ?street) as patterns within an "and" to be
matched rather than (test (and (eq ?ov ?locality) (eq ?wv ?street))). By the
way, the outer "and" on the LHS of locality-stree is unnecessary.
Hi,
I have tried loading the following code with the batch command, then
(run)ing the whole lot, unfortunately my rule is not firing. I was expecting
the rule to fire, and as a result there should be several new
locality-street-match facts.
The code includes:
-
