Drools 3.1.0-M1 rules build 3.0.4 compatibility problems with eval statements

Hi Tom - its great you are trying this out - once again - could you attach enough to reproduce this to a JIRA? It will get added to the integration tests.

There is no fundamental reason why you can't cast like that at all, its certainly not a design constraint, just - SHOCK - a bug ! Say it isn't so !

On 3/2/07, Tom Gonzalez <tomgon@nortel.com> wrote:
We are in the process of converting from 3.0.4 to 3.1.0-M1 and having problems building rules that have eval statements in them that buil d in 3.0.4 with no problems.

We are getting rules build errors as follows:

[java] Feb 28, 2007 5:55:29 PM com.nortel.connect.rbuilder.RulePackager build
[java] INFO: ============== Start build RulePackage: [engrules.mss] =========
[java] Feb 28, 2007 5:55:29 PM com.nortel.connect.rbuilder.RulePackage addRulesFromDrlFile
[java] INFO: adding Rules from: MG15000Rules.drl (with associated DSL)
[java] Feb 28, 2007 5:55:29 PM com.nortel.connect.rbuilder.RulePackage addRulesFromDrlFile
[java] INFO: parsed rules using dsl
[java] org.drools.RuntimeDroolsException: unable to find the function ','
[java] at org.drools.semantics.java.StaticMethodFunctionResolver.resolveFunction(StaticMethodFunctionResolver.java:9)

[java] at org.drools.semantics.java.FunctionFixer.fix(FunctionFixer.java:132)
[java] at org.drools.semantics.java.FunctionFixer.fix(FunctionFixer.java:103)
[java] at org.drools.semantics.java.FunctionFixer.fix(FunctionFixer.java:66)
[java] at org.drools.semantics.java.builder.EvalBuilder.build(EvalBuilder.java:78)
[java] at org.drools.semantics.java.builder.GroupElementBuilder.build(GroupElementBuilder.java:63)
[java] at org.drools.semantics.java.builder.GroupElementBuilder.build(GroupElementBuilder.java:63)
[java] at org.drools.semantics.java.RuleBuilder.build(RuleBuilder.java:178)
[java] at org.drools.compiler.PackageBuilder.addRule(PackageBuilder.java:381)
[java] at org.drools.compiler.PackageBuilder.addPackage(PackageBuilder.java:219)
[java] at com.nortel.connect.rbuilder.RulePackage.addRulesFromDrlFile(RulePackage.java:229)
[java] at com.nortel.connect.rbuilder.RulePackager.build(RulePackager.java:206)
[java] at com.nortel.connect.rbuilder.RulePackager.buildAll(RulePackager.java:142)
[java] at com.nortel.connect.rbuilder.RulePackager.main(RulePackager.java:92)
[java] Feb 28, 2007 5:55:30 PM com.nortel.connect.rbuilder.RulePackage addRulesFromDrlFile

We have a number of rules with eval's in them such as:

eval( !(checkVspToInstanceRatio( (Integer)$vsp3ocount, (Integer)$vsp4ecount, (Integer)$vsp3count, (Integer)$nstacount)) );

eval ( !(strInStr((String)$shelfsn,(String)$netwksn))

eval( !(checkDlepNumber( (Integer)$dlepkey, (Integer)$nstakey)) || !(isEvenInteger((Integer)$nstakey))

The parser has issue with the cast syntax in the eval removing the cast (like (Integer) ) cleans up the paser issue however this is not a feasible solution. Casting is required in some cases with out adding a good bit of extra work.

Can you restore the support we previously had for casting with in an eval and retain the flexibility of using casts when needed?

Thanks,

Regards,

Tom G