Some comments on the use of ambiguous decision tables and their conversion to computer programs

ABSTRACT

This paper comments upon recently published work on decision table translation using methods similar to the rule-mask technique. The applicability of these methods under various possible conventions on overall table meaning is discussed, and it is argued that there is a place both for the multi-rule and the single-rule (or action set) convention in decision table usage.

REFERENCES

• 1: C. R. Muthukrishnan , V. Rajaraman, On the conversion of decision tables to computer programs, Communications of the ACM, v.13 n.6, p.347-351, June 1970 [doi>10.1145/362384.362390]
• 2: Solomon L. Pollack, Comment on the conversion of decision tables to computer programs, Communications of the ACM, v.14 n.1, p.52, Jan. 1971 [doi>10.1145/362452.362514]
• 3: Muthukrishnan, C.R. Reply to the comment by Pollack. Comm. ACM 14, 1 (Jan. 1971), 52.
• 4: King, P.J.H. Tbe interpretation of limited entry decision table format and relationships among conditions. Computer J. 12, 4 (Nov. 1969), 320-326.
• 5: Barnard, T.J. A new rule mask technique for interpreting decision tables. Computer Bulletin 13, 5 (May 1969), 153-154.
• 6: P. J. H. King, Ambiguity in limited entry decision tables, Communications of the ACM, v.11 n.10, p.680-684, Oct. 1968 [doi>10.1145/364096.364113]
• 7: Pollack, S.L., Hicks, H.T., and Harrison, W.J. Decision Tables: Theory and Practice. Communigraph Series on Business Data Processing, Wiley, New York, 1971.
• 8: V. G. Sprague , Solomon L. Pollack, On storage space of decision tables, Communications of the ACM, v.9 n.5, p.319-320, May 1966 [doi>10.1145/355592.365587]

INDEX TERMS

Keywords:
decision tables, programming, systems analysis