ホーム
製品
Red Hat Decision Manager
7.10
Developing decision services in Red Hat Decision Manager
16.11. Error messages for DRL troubleshooting

16.11. Error messages for DRL troubleshooting

Red Hat Decision Manager provides standardized messages for DRL errors to help you troubleshoot and resolve problems in your DRL files. The error messages use the following format:

図16.1 Error message format for DRL file problems

1st Block: Error code
2nd Block: Line and column in the DRL source where the error occurred
3rd Block: Description of the problem
4th Block: Component in the DRL source (rule, function, query) where the error occurred
5th Block: Pattern in the DRL source where the error occurred (if applicable)

Red Hat Decision Manager supports the following standardized error messages:

101: no viable alternative

Indicates that the parser reached a decision point but could not identify an alternative.

Example rule with incorrect spelling

1: rule "simple rule"
2:   when
3:     exists Person()
4:     exits Student()  // Must be `exists`
5:   then
6: end

Error message

[ERR 101] Line 4:4 no viable alternative at input 'exits' in rule "simple rule"

Example rule without a rule name

1: package org.drools.examples;
2: rule    // Must be `rule "rule name"` (or `rule rule_name` if no spacing)
3:   when
4:     Object()
5:   then
6:     System.out.println("A RHS");
7: end

Error message

[ERR 101] Line 3:2 no viable alternative at input 'when'

In this example, the parser encountered the keyword when but expected the rule name, so it flags when as the incorrect expected token.

Example rule with incorrect syntax

1: rule "simple rule"
2:   when
3:     Student( name == "Andy )  // Must be `"Andy"`
4:   then
5: end

Error message

[ERR 101] Line 0:-1 no viable alternative at input '<eof>' in rule "simple rule" in pattern Student

注記

A line and column value of 0:-1 means the parser reached the end of the source file (<eof>) but encountered incomplete constructs, usually due to missing quotation marks "…", apostrophes '…', or parentheses (…).

102: mismatched input

Indicates that the parser expected a particular symbol that is missing at the current input position.

Example rule with an incomplete rule statement

1: rule simple_rule
2:   when
3:     $p : Person(
        // Must be a complete rule statement

Error message

[ERR 102] Line 0:-1 mismatched input '<eof>' expecting ')' in rule "simple rule" in pattern Person

注記

Example rule with incorrect syntax

1: package org.drools.examples;
2:
3: rule "Wrong syntax"
4:   when
5:     not( Car( ( type == "tesla", price == 10000 ) || ( type == "kia", price == 1000 ) ) from $carList )
       // Must use `&&` operators instead of commas `,`
6:   then
7:     System.out.println("OK");
8: end

Error messages

[ERR 102] Line 5:36 mismatched input ',' expecting ')' in rule "Wrong syntax" in pattern Car
[ERR 101] Line 5:57 no viable alternative at input 'type' in rule "Wrong syntax"
[ERR 102] Line 5:106 mismatched input ')' expecting 'then' in rule "Wrong syntax"

In this example, the syntactic problem results in multiple error messages related to each other. The single solution of replacing the commas , with && operators resolves all errors. If you encounter multiple errors, resolve one at a time in case errors are consequences of previous errors.

103: failed predicate

Indicates that a validating semantic predicate evaluated to false. These semantic predicates are typically used to identify component keywords in DRL files, such as declare, rule, exists, not, and others.

Example rule with an invalid keyword

 1: package nesting;
 2:
 3: import org.drools.compiler.Person
 4: import org.drools.compiler.Address
 5:
 6: Some text  // Must be a valid DRL keyword
 7:
 8: rule "test something"
 9:   when
10:     $p: Person( name=="Michael" )
11:   then
12:     $p.name = "other";
13:     System.out.println(p.name);
14: end

Error message

[ERR 103] Line 6:0 rule 'rule_key' failed predicate: {(validateIdentifierKey(DroolsSoftKeywords.RULE))}? in rule

The Some text line is invalid because it does not begin with or is not a part of a DRL keyword construct, so the parser fails to validate the rest of the DRL file.

注記

This error is similar to 102: mismatched input, but usually involves DRL keywords.

104: trailing semi-colon not allowed

Indicates that an eval() clause in a rule condition uses a semicolon ; but must not use one.

Example rule with eval() and trailing semicolon

1: rule "simple rule"
2:   when
3:     eval( abc(); )  // Must not use semicolon `;`
4:   then
5: end

Error message

[ERR 104] Line 3:4 trailing semi-colon not allowed in rule "simple rule"

105: did not match anything

Indicates that the parser reached a sub-rule in the grammar that must match an alternative at least once, but the sub-rule did not match anything. The parser has entered a branch with no way out.

Example rule with invalid text in an empty condition

1: rule "empty condition"
2:   when
3:     None  // Must remove `None` if condition is empty
4:   then
5:      insert( new Person() );
6: end

Error message

[ERR 105] Line 2:2 required (...)+ loop did not match anything at input 'WHEN' in rule "empty condition"

In this example, the condition is intended to be empty but the word None is used. This error is resolved by removing None, which is not a valid DRL keyword, data type, or pattern construct.

注記

If you encounter other DRL error messages that you cannot resolve, contact your Red Hat Technical Account Manager.

16.11. Error messages for DRL troubleshooting

詳細情報

試用、購入および販売

コミュニティー

Red Hat ドキュメントについて

多様性を受け入れるオープンソースの強化

会社概要

Theme

Red Hat legal and privacy links

Red Hat legal and privacy links