Re: [rules-users] RE:[ rules-users] Rule engine is worth?
Here are some reasons why a rules engine is better than straight hard coding in Java: - Even if your business end-users/analysts can not add/edit rules, they can at least see them and mostly understand them - You can make the Drools/JBoss Rules rule visible and editable in a spreadsheet - decision table. - You can make the Drools/JBoss Rules rule visible and editable in your own custom application that aids your end-users. - You can make the Drools/JBoss Rules rule visible and editable in a Domain Specific Language which you craft for your end-users. - You can make the Drools/JBoss Rules rule visible and editable in the new BRMS which has a really nice Rich Internet Application (RIA) UI with a Guided Rules Editor - basically point & click rule creation. - A rules engine allows for logic that is very, very complex. If you wrote it in Java with all the necessary nested if-then-else constructs it would be unmaintainable code or have a high CC value. - It should perform better than highly nested, looping, goto-oriented (break/continue myLabel;), if-then-else statements that are unmaintainable. I would agree that the average non-technical end-user is not going to build/edit rules on a regular basis. People who can edit rules also need to understand logical constructs, basic flow of control concepts, the problem/business domain, the greater business process and to some degree a bit about the overall infrastructure of the company. These are relatively sharp people. They can use advanced reporting tools. They can comprehend what an average SQL statement is doing. They are not lowly paid individuals. Most good business analysts (IMHO) have a background in COBOL, C, various 4GLs, SQL, etc. So those types of people can comprehend those things that I mentioned above. And can use decision table, a custom UI, DSL or the guided rules editor to make the changes they need. Sikkandar Nawabjan wrote: Hi, I have a question. After gone through several rule engines and rule engine documents i learned the capability of rule engine is very good interms of giving coding/changing rules to business analyst.he able to modify the rule without the help of technical person. But the reality is not so. i belevie none of the rule engine including Drools reaching that level. For example to add a simple rule you need a technical person help. what benefits rule engine put in a big project. i don't want thoretical explanation. please let me know any real advantage lies there in implementing rule engine. Beside portability is absolutely not possible(despite being RULEML is defined). If it is not reached that level how it gonna be fit into SOA Thanks and Regs, Basha From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thu 6/7/2007 11:27 AM To: rules-users@lists.jboss.org Subject: rules-users Digest, Vol 7, Issue 13 Send rules-users mailing list submissions to rules-users@lists.jboss.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to [EMAIL PROTECTED] You can reach the person managing the list at [EMAIL PROTECTED] When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of rules-users digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: rule not valid... (Rahul Phadnis) 2. Re: New version of MSMTeam RuleEditor is on SourceForge (Mark Proctor) 3. Re: New version of MSMTeam RuleEditor is on SourceForge (Marko Frankovic) 4. working with deep object graph (Chris Mathrusse) 5. Re: working with deep object graph (Mark Proctor) 6. Dependency with JBoss (Joj) 7. Re: Dependency with JBoss (Mark Proctor) -- Message: 1 Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2007 13:56:10 -0700 (PDT) From: Rahul Phadnis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [rules-users] rule not valid... To: Rules Users List Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 You probably need a package definition at the top of the file. Please also import the SupplierView class in the rules drl file. You can also first test using the drools sample files. -Rahul --- "Manukyan, Sergey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Folks, I am using Rules 4.0 in WebSphere 6.0 app server. Made a simple test file with a simple rule : rule "Test" when cs : SupplierView() then System.out.println(cs); end But getting exception: [6/6/07 16:13:06:456 EDT] 0020 SystemErr R java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: The rule called Test is not valid. Check for compile errors reported. at org.drools.common.AbstractRuleBase.addRule(AbstractRuleBase.java:363) at org.drools.reteoo.ReteooRuleBase.addRule(ReteooRuleBase.java:263) at org.dro
[rules-users] RE:[ rules-users] Rule engine is worth?
Hi, I have a question. After gone through several rule engines and rule engine documents i learned the capability of rule engine is very good interms of giving coding/changing rules to business analyst.he able to modify the rule without the help of technical person. But the reality is not so. i belevie none of the rule engine including Drools reaching that level. For example to add a simple rule you need a technical person help. what benefits rule engine put in a big project. i don't want thoretical explanation. please let me know any real advantage lies there in implementing rule engine. Beside portability is absolutely not possible(despite being RULEML is defined). If it is not reached that level how it gonna be fit into SOA Thanks and Regs, Basha From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thu 6/7/2007 11:27 AM To: rules-users@lists.jboss.org Subject: rules-users Digest, Vol 7, Issue 13 Send rules-users mailing list submissions to rules-users@lists.jboss.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to [EMAIL PROTECTED] You can reach the person managing the list at [EMAIL PROTECTED] When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of rules-users digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: rule not valid... (Rahul Phadnis) 2. Re: New version of MSMTeam RuleEditor is on SourceForge (Mark Proctor) 3. Re: New version of MSMTeam RuleEditor is on SourceForge (Marko Frankovic) 4. working with deep object graph (Chris Mathrusse) 5. Re: working with deep object graph (Mark Proctor) 6. Dependency with JBoss (Joj) 7. Re: Dependency with JBoss (Mark Proctor) -- Message: 1 Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2007 13:56:10 -0700 (PDT) From: Rahul Phadnis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [rules-users] rule not valid... To: Rules Users List Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 You probably need a package definition at the top of the file. Please also import the SupplierView class in the rules drl file. You can also first test using the drools sample files. -Rahul --- "Manukyan, Sergey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Folks, > > > > I am using Rules 4.0 in WebSphere 6.0 app server. > > > > Made a simple test file with a simple rule : > > > > rule "Test" > > when > > cs : SupplierView() > > then > > System.out.println(cs); > > end > > > > > > But getting exception: > > > > > > [6/6/07 16:13:06:456 EDT] 0020 SystemErr R > java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: The rule called > Test is not valid. > Check for compile errors reported. > > at > org.drools.common.AbstractRuleBase.addRule(AbstractRuleBase.java:363) > > at > org.drools.reteoo.ReteooRuleBase.addRule(ReteooRuleBase.java:263) > > at > org.drools.common.AbstractRuleBase.addPackage(AbstractRuleBase.java:293) > > > > > > > > How can I check compile errors?? And what is not > valid in this rule? > > > > Thanks for any ideas... > > > > -Sergey > > > > > > > > ** > ** LEGAL DISCLAIMER ** > ** > > This E-mail message and any attachments may contain > legally privileged, confidential or proprietary > information. If you are not the intended > recipient(s), > or the employee or agent responsible for delivery of > > this message to the intended recipient(s), you are > hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution > > or copying of this E-mail message is strictly > prohibited. If you have received this message in > error, please immediately notify the sender and > delete this E-mail message from your computer.> ___ > rules-users mailing list > rules-users@lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users > -- Message: 2 Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2007 22:02:26 +0100 From: Mark Proctor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [rules-users] New version of MSMTeam RuleEditor is on SourceForge To: Rules Users List Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" MSM Team, Good work on the project, have you thought of working with us to help build a better integrated tool, rather than a seperate satelite tool? We have someone working on unified belief system at the moment, that should allow fuzzy logic, and others, to be integrated. This system will be an integrated extension of the Rete network. Mark Marko Frankovic wrote: > Greetings! > > Having difficulties in writing rules? Then try this visual editor! > > What is new ? > - Fuzzy logic on one specific way > - New Decision and Arithmetic Tables are built in. > - Debuger (replay of rules fire) > - and muc
