On Wed, 2012-09-26 at 17:42 +0200, Axb wrote: > On 09/26/2012 05:38 PM, Martin Gregorie wrote: > > > then realised that SA makes no guarantees about the order in which rules > > are executed other than metarules being executed after all the > > (sub)rules they reference. Obviously this prevents the use of variables > > in rules. > > you could try and play with priorities... > > priority RULENAME -300 > > Noted, but its not something I need at present, and don't currently see a use for until/unless variables are introduced to allow arbitrary data to be passed between rules.
Martin
