If you're modifying the customer and you expect the rule engine to act on
the basis of those modifications, you should call the modify() method. That
seems to be true in the situation you're describing, from what I skim-read
of your question.
On 12/30/06, Sudha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
I have two objects in my domain. Customer and Item objects. Each item has
a
unique item code. The goal is to group item objects based on the item
code.
So, as soon as I receive an item from a customer, I run my rule to find
out
2 things: 1) If the customer already has an item with the same item code.
If
so, I just update the item with the new quantity 2) If customer does not
have the item type, I create a new item of that type under that customer
object.
To differentiate between the incoming item and the one that is already
grouped, I have a IncomingItem and GroupedItem object type. Customer
contains a list of grouped items.
Customer, groupedItems and incomingItems are a part of my working memory.
I
compare incoming Item against the grouped Item of customer to determine
what
i need to do. Following are the two rules that does that for me:
rule "Item Exist"
salience 100
when
incomingItem : IncomingItem()
customer : Customer( $groupedItems: groupedItems ->
($groupedItems.containsKey(incomingItem.item)))
then
customer.updatedGroupedItem(incomingItem);
end
rule "Item Does Not Exist"
salience 90
when
incomingItem: IncomingItem()
customer : Customer( $groupedItems: groupedItems ->
($groupedItems.containsKey(incomingItem.item)
== false))
then
System.out.println("Executing No Matched Grouped Items Rule");
customer.addGroupedItem(new GroupedItem(...));
end
I tried the following steps:
1. I created a customer test object with two dummy grouped item objects
with
unique item code ( item1 and item2).
2. I created two dummy incoming item objects with item code as 'item3'.
3. I populated my working memory with my customer, grouped item and
incoming
objects and fired the rule.
I was expecting the following to happen:
Since 'item3' is not already present for this customer, the 'Item does
not
exist' rule condition would get satisfied. My understanding so far was
right. A new groupeditem object of type 'item3' was created and added to
the customer.
Now, there was one more incoming item of the same type in the working
memory. I was expecting the 'item exist' rule to be executed. Because, the
groupeditem just got created as a result of the first object. But, that is
not the case. The 'Item does not exist' rule gets executed again.
Do I need to call modifyObject on my customer or something for the next
item
object to correctly identify that a item of that type already exist for
that
customer? Is this the right way to go about this peice of requirement.
Thanks in advance.
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Question-on-working-memory-and-its-working-tf2899258.html#a8100179
Sent from the drools - user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list please visit:
http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
--
Geoffrey Wiseman
