[rules-users] counting facts of a kind

[Edson Tirelli]

>
>
> Good to know. OTOH, is there any good reason for count() having an argument
> at all? Just because all others have an argument? Nowadays, the uniform
> signature could be (Object... objs) which would, e.g., permit you to write
> count() without the dummy argument. Others, such as sum, average and
> especially min and max could easily handle more than one argument. Not a
> bonanza, but being general is not a bad thing...
>
>
I agree. Working on it as we speak. The new Drools version will bring
several changes on syntax that will hopefully make the language less verbose
and more consistent overall.

Edson
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/rules-users/attachments/20100824/f2a9c67a/attachment.html