Details

    • Type: Sub-task
    • Status: Resolved (View Workflow)
    • Priority: Major
    • Resolution: Done
    • Affects Version/s: None
    • Fix Version/s: None
    • Component/s: None
    • Labels:
      None
    • Docs QE Status:
      NEW
    • QE Status:
      NEW

      Description

      This is same as Hit Policy None GUVNOR-2650, but we block the use of salience. Since it can change the priorities. We want to be able to have multi hit in the order that the items are in the table.

      Example 1 of a table that could use Rule Order
      If score is above Set client status to
      1000 Gold
      100 Silver
      10 Bronze
      Example 2
      Application is active Activate activation-group
      x Last
      x Second
      x First
      Example 3
      Savings between Yearly income Max. credit allowed
        > 50 000 10 000
      10 000 - 5 000   5000
        25 000 - 50 000 2500
      5 000 - 1000   2500
      0 - 1000   500
        < 25 000 250

      All the rules might fire, but since we force the order the client gets to keep the best possible status.

      Code generation

      Rule order makes the dtable code generation set salience for the dtable rows. Lowest line has 0 as salience and for each above that we up it by 1.
      The actual row number is ignored, since the dtable might be generated. What matters is the order of the lines.

      We do not protect the salience "chain" in anyway. All the rules might not fire. Any that are able to fire, we try to fire in the given order. The user can write logic that reverses or blocks the order. Either in the dtable or out side of it, for example in a separate DRL.

      Ideas for V&V:

      In V&V do we need to care about:

      • Redundancy
        • For sure the rules are not redundant since the salience is not the same, but does it make sense to report redundancy when two lines are redundant (if salience is ignored)
      • Subsumption
      • Conflicts
      • Overlap
      • Defiency
        • At this point can't think of a situation where looking for this would make sense. It rather makes sense that the table with Rule Order has defiency

      The answer: At this point it looks like these make no sense, the salience is the key and makes the checks pointless.

      Additional checks for V&V that are not active by default

      Example 1: Reversing the activation order with table content
      Counter Set counter to
      0 -1
      1 0
      2 1

      Kind of like the keyword "goto" bad practice, but can happen.

        Gliffy Diagrams

          Attachments

            Activity

              People

              • Assignee:
                Rikkola Toni Rikkola
                Reporter:
                Rikkola Toni Rikkola
              • Votes:
                0 Vote for this issue
                Watchers:
                1 Start watching this issue

                Dates

                • Created:
                  Updated:
                  Resolved: