I've put the Drools Manual into place to facilitate proper
documentation. My long term plans for this is to become a complete Rule
Engine resource , so that Drools is the best documented Rule Engine, bar
none, and hopefully we can get it published. I really hope users will
contribute to it.
Mark
Russ Egan wrote:
Speaking of which, I've tried to find good, in-depth guides for rules
engine usage. Best practices, rules writing guidelines, cookbooks,
advanced use cases, patterns, etc... All I've found are very shallow
"introductions" to rules engines. Does anyone know of good,
educational materials of this nature on the web? Or good books?
It's tough to avoid using rules engines "the wrong way" when this is
little guidance for using them "right way", and when rules engines are
so conceptually different from procedural programming.
Hello Mark,
Unfortunately I'm finding that many people just cannot adjust to the
declarative and coupletely decoupled nature of a rule engine. The end
result is that Drools is used as a script execution framework.
Felipe Piccolini wrote:
Mark,
I could vote on this, I would vote no to the 'else'. The declarative
thing about rule engines is that: no procedural code. So if you wanna
do an 'else' condition you should re-think your rule and chack if its
well writen. Of course this is just MHO.
:)
Tuesday, April 11, 2006, 6:09:22 AM, you wrote:
I thought about adding 'else' but I couldn't decide on the best way
to implement it, as there are several possabilities. Also 'else' is
not considered declarative, so its a kinda of code smell. I'll llook
into this again in 3.1
Mark
Geoffrey Wiseman wrote:
On 4/10/06, Dmitry Goldenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
What is the timeframe for 3.1? Else/else if are very important to
what we're trying to do.
I can see how I can to the following with the method described by
Geoffrey:
if (A) then B else if (C) then D endif
I also want to be able to do the following:
if (A) then B else D endif
I imagine that the rule would have to be written as a combo of
if (A) then B endif
if (!A) then D endif
so that the conditions are complimentary...
Indeed, yes, that's how you'd handle it.
If it does make it into 3.1, that's a good thing in terms of
supporting the way people think, talk, and work in other languages,
but fundamentally, the same capabilities are there now -- they just
require more typing.
- Geoffrey
--
Geoffrey Wiseman
--------------------------
Felipe Piccolini
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
