Re: [Logs-devel] rule macro attempt #1

[Vijay Lakshminarayanan]

On 6/4/06, Jim Prewett <address@hidden> wrote:
> > > I was wondering how you're envisioning this working for rules that create
> > > rules ... that create rules?
> > >
> > > (make-instance 'rule
> > >         :actions
> > >         (list
> > >           (lambda (message)
> > >              (enqueue *root-ruleset* (make-instance 'rule ...)))))
> >
> > We just use the macro again, I guess.
> >
> > (rule performing (lambda (message) (enqueue *root-ruleset* (rule
> ...))))
> >
>
> I was hoping that was the answer :)

Oh so it's a Good Thing?  That's a relief :-)

> > In time we should have a single function which does the enqueing.
>
> I don't think you're quite understanding the ruleset tree structure.
> rulesets contain rules and other rulesets.  You may want to have a rule
> that creates a new rule on a completely different part of the tree.

You're right.  I completely forgot about this -- I was totally
immersed into defining the macro's behavior itself.

> In other words, I don't see specifying the ruleset you're adding the rule
> to to be a loss.
>
> Jim

Will come up with more and better quality code soon, Jim.

Thanks
Vijay