No Drools works off the objects directly. In future, they will be optional shadow support for shallow copying of your facts to insulate from concurrent changes, but by default it works off the naked un proxied/copied objects (which makes some things a challenge ! But we believe it makes it worth it for users in the end).
Also, Drools isn't really interpreted other then when it is using Jython - otherwise it is bytecode that is running, same as you would do by hand. On 2/23/06, Peter Van Weert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Maybe not a good thing to say on the Drools mailinglist, but maybe there > are alternatives that require less work. Since Prolog is backward > chaining with integrated search and Drools is forward chaining and has > no search support, I think moving from the former to the latter might be > a rather big change. > Alternatives to consider are Prolog interpreters written in Java > (JIProlog, tuProlog, etc): their performance might be less than Prolog, > but don't forget Drools is also an interpreter; or maybe better use a > compiler that compiles your existing Prolog source code to executable > Java classes (JProlog, etc) or bytecode. > > Peter > > > > Marcelo Tallis wrote: > > We were using prolog to implement the inference support for our > > applications. Now we are looking at switching to drools because we > cannot > > bare the overhead of translating between java and prolog the > representation > > of every data element that we pass to prolog. For example, integer > numbers > > in java are represented differently than in prolog and their > representation > > needed to be translated back and forth across the java / prolog > interface. > > > > Drools seems to handle java objects in its primitive representation > (good!). > > However, we don't know how objects are represented in WorkingMemory. > > > > Question: > > ------------- > > > > Is the WorkingMemory keeping its own parallel COPY of the asserted > objects > > or it is only keeping REFERENCES to the actual objects? If the WM is > copying > > (or creating its own representation) of the asserted objects then the > drools > > alternative might not be as attractive as we thought. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Marcelo > > > > > > > > >
