The site is legacy and eventually drools.org will point ot the new labs
website - however we have not finished the entire site migration yet.
For now the site is clearly marked legacy.
Mark
Dmitry Goldenberg wrote:
Yes, especially because the new 3.0 stuff is not backward-compatible with 2.x. It means
2.x is effectively obsoleted and so the drools.org doc should be either stamped with
"2.x" all over it or replaced with 3.0, IMHO.
________________________________
From: Michael Neale [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thu 4/13/2006 10:40 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [drools-user] The DRL notation vs. jbossrules Rule Language - ?
I think the general confusion is around the www.drools.org stuff, and the
new jboss rules stuff. Perhaps we need to put a big link on the
drools.orgstuff to the drools 3 documentation, and make it clear that
the
drools.org documentation is for 2.x?
On 4/14/06, Mark Proctor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Dmitry,
No idea what you are talking about All Drools 3.0 integration tests and
examples are in the new drl format. Having the old format would be
pointless, we can't even parse it.
http://anonsvn.labs.jboss.com/labs/jbossrules/trunk/drools-examples/src/rules/
Mark
Dmitry Goldenberg wrote:
It would be great if Drools would come with its example DRL files
written in the new lingo rather than the old....
________________________________
From: Mark Proctor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thu 4/13/2006 4:28 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [drools-user] The DRL notation vs. jbossrules Rule Language
- ?
As per my email the other day if you were to write an XSLT here is
what it would do
<parameter identifer="person">
<class>Person</class>
</parameter>
<java:condition>person.getName().equals("tom")</java:condition>
----------------
person : Person()
eval( person.getName().equals("tom") )
----------------
However that is no longer optimal in Drools 3.0 and should be
Person( name == "tom" )
If you need to bind then its
p : Person( name == "tom" )
Mark
Ronald van Kuijk wrote:
AINAE, but it could be as simple as 'replacing' condition with when and
consequence with then, but I'll let the experts tell me.
Ronald
2006/4/13, Dmitry Goldenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
I don't understand the relationship between the XML-based DRL notation
and
this new lingo with "when" / "then".
With the DRL notation, my understanding is that you write an XML
structure
like the one I'm including below. How does this change with the
when/then
notation? Thanks.
<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rule-set name="SamplePolicyRuleSet"
xmlns="http://drools.org/rules";
xmlns:java="http://drools.org/semantics/java";
xmlns:xs="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance";
xs:schemaLocation="http://drools.org/rules rules.xsd
http://drools.org/semantics/java java.xsd">
<!-- Imports -->
<java:import>java.lang.Object</java:import>
<java:import>java.lang.String</java:import>
<!-- Utility functions -->
<java:functions>
public boolean f1(
com.weblayers.platform.rule.PolicyExecContextcontext)
{
return ...;
}
public boolean f2(
com.weblayers.platform.rule.PolicyExecContextcontext)
{
return ...;
}
</java:functions>
<!-First Rule: IF (P1 AND P2) THEN RETURN OK -->
<rule name="First Rule">
<!-- Rule parameters -->
<parameter identifier="context">
<class>MyContext</class>
</parameter>
<!-- Rule Conditions -->
<java:condition>
f1() && f2()
</java:condition>
<!-- Rule Consequences -->
<java:consequence>
context.setReturn(Constants.OK);
</java:consequence>
</rule>
<!-Second Rule: IF (!(P1 AND P2)) THEN RETURN FAILURE -->
<rule name="Second Rule">
<!-- Rule parameters -->
<parameter identifier="context">
<class>MyContext</class>
</parameter>
<!-- Rule Conditions -->
<java:condition>
!(f1() && f2())
</java:condition>
<!-- Rule Consequences -->
<java:consequence>
context.setVerdict(Constants.FAIL);
</java:consequence>
</rule>
</rule-set>
