My response the Jim's post addresses why this is not compelling to me but you are correct. It would be easier. In fact so much so that I can't see a benefit in just creating a wrapper. Anyone could cook that up themselves in short order. There really isn't and value add.
I'm invisioning something more tightly integrated with Clojure that doesn't have external dependencies. It would be written from the ground up in Clojure and would leverage some of Clojure's more important features: STM and immutability. Immutable Rules as a data type is something that I've been toying with for some time. Such a capability would natively provide historical reference to "real" inference states at points in time. This capability would make debugging rule bases an order of magnitude easier. On Jul 26, 9:51 am, Vagif Verdi <vagif.ve...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Jul 26, 6:34 am, jim <jim.d...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > One thing I'd like to do is implement a business rules engine in > > Clojure running the Rete algorithm or something similar. Sort of a > > Drools in Clojure. > > Wouldn't it be easier to implement clojure scripting for Drools ? As > far as i know Drools allows several scripting options for it's rules > definitions. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
