#7 extending mismatch between activate and prove

hg-pyke
closed-fixed
pyke (39)
5
2008-01-04
2008-01-02
Kevin Quick
No

Given two .krb files:

first.krb:
...

second.krb:
extending first
....

it seems to be necessary to pyke.activate('second') but
then to pyke.prove_n('first', ...).

This seems inconsistent (and required digging to find--some debug functions to display a list of kb and rb namespaces would be helpful).

Also, issuing: pyke.assert('first', .., ..) before the prove_n seems to destroy the 'first' rulebase.

Discussion

    • status: open --> closed-fixed
     
  • Logged In: YES
    user_id=301752
    Originator: NO

    I've extensively revised the documentation, specifically pages: Overview -> Plans, Overview -> Knowledge Bases -> Rule Bases and KRB Syntax -> Bc_rule to try to clarify the confusion here.

    Your final comment was a bug. The system should have generated an exception when a fact base and rule base of the same name are created. This is fixed in svn revision 55 and will be incorporated into the alpha 2 release.