Disjunctions in Rules #192
Draft
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR adds support for
Disjunctions inRuleheads and bodies within therulewerk-corepackage.The changes in the other packages were necessary to fit the adjustments in
rulewerk-core.To maintain a certain flexibility especially in existing code and also to achieve a pleasant usage of the
Ruleinterface, the following basic inheritance structure is introduced:In this sense, a
Conjunctioncan implicitly be treated as a singletonDisjunctionand aLiteralcan implicitly be treated as a singletonConjunction(and in turn as aDisjunction). ARulethen just consists of twoDisjunctionsofConjunctionsof(Positive)Literals.The three interfaces also expect generic type arguments to clarify the concrete types of
ConjunctionsandLiteralsespecially. Because of that, the structure may seem a bit complicated in the source code but from a usage point of view I guess that this would be convenient.Note that this is currently still WIP and I'm am going to evaluate how the current implementation suits the needs of an application I'm currently developing using the
rulewerklibrary. Also, I still need to implement some tests.Any kind of feedback is very much appreciated and I'm happy to discuss the design decisions :)