given the rules:

[[(coords ?pos ?x ?y)
     [?pos :position/x ?x]
     [?pos :position/y ?y]]

    [(near ?i1 ?i2)
     [(inc ?i1) ?i2]]
    [(near ?i1 ?i2)
     [(dec ?i1) ?i2]]

     [(neighbor ?pos1 ?pos2)
     (coords ?pos1 ?x1 ?y1)
     (near ?x1 ?x2)
     (near ?y1 ?y2)
     [?pos2 :position/x ?x2]
     [?pos2 :position/y ?y2]]

    [(connected ?pos1 ?pos2 ?via)
     (neighbor ?pos1 ?via)
     (neighbor ?pos2 ?via)]

What result do you get vs what do you expect?

i expect the first image to have [4 4] and [0 0] highlighted in green in addition to what is there, but the results i get are missing those 2 values.

Can you post the full database you're using?

better if you copy all that & full DB structure/content into github issue

yea will do

http://github.com/tonsky/datascript/issues

idk if it’s an issue it might just be my code

thanks, I’ll take a look

yeah I can’t spot any immediate problems, might as well be a bug

i’ll write an issue later, when i get some time to make that gist.

a semi related question, does rule body order matter

[(rule1 ?a)
 (subrule1 ?a)
 (subrule2 ?a)]

[(rule2 ?a)
(subrule2 ?a)
(subrule1 ?a)]

yes

on the other hand, there’s always room for some bugs :)

recursive rules is one of the most complicated parts in DS

I’m sorry i phrased my question weird, yes rule1 and rule2 are equal or yes rule order matters?

yes they should be equal

even if they have function rules like [(fn ?a ?b) ?c]?

for function rules there’s just one limitation: all arguments should be bound at the call place

so you can’t have ?a or ?b bound after fn call, only before

but you can make additional rules after the fn call of course

@tonsky https://github.com/tonsky/datascript/issues/239 and I didn’t mention it but thanks for responding