[racket] Preferred business rules engines in or used by Racket?

From: Doug Williams (m.douglas.williams at gmail.com)
Date: Sun Oct 21 14:04:46 EDT 2012


Sorry I haven't been keeping up with the list and just saw this today.
The inference collection in PLaneT implements a classic rule-based
inference engine. I'm not sure if that is what you are looking for.
Take a look and I can help with further explanations if needed.


On Sun, Oct 7, 2012 at 11:15 AM, Grant Rettke <grettke at acm.org> wrote:
> Hi,
> May you please share your experience or preferences for rules engines
> written in or used from Racket?
> My goal is to:
> 1. Allow rule definitions separate from the code (though I view rule
> definitions as programming to be performed by the programmer).
> 2. Allow rules to be defined in modules.
> 3. Provide debugging features such that I may sit with a business
> user, and start with a particular scenario of data, and walk them
> through how the rules transform the data. The goal is to be able to
> answer questions from the business eg "I didn't expect this result,
> why is it this way?.
> 4. Debugging.
> 5. Nice editing.
> 6. Find something nice for 3-9 month projects with 2-4 developers; in
> other words not looking for an enterprise system with licensing priced
> accordingly.
> 7. Any technology is an option because we can probably use it with
> some form of interop.
> 8. Find something that people use for real work for a long time.
> 9. Find something that costs not more than a thousand USD.
> 10. Find something that changes how you think, has materials to help
> change that, and gets you down the path of thinking about how to write
> system with rules engines rather than shoe-horn them into a corner.
> Best wishes,
> Grant
> --
> ((λ (x) (x x)) (λ (x) (x x)))
> http://www.wisdomandwonder.com/
> ____________________
>   Racket Users list:
>   http://lists.racket-lang.org/users

Posted on the users mailing list.