[rules-users] forall is satisfied when there is nothing?

[Sonata]

Davide Sottara wrote
> This is actually the way it is implemented internally, and no, I don't
> think that
> it would be appropriate to change it.

Yes I agree, so may be we users actually do not need forall, but *every*,
which just means forall and exists
Now, look at it again:
  when every Cloth( dried ) then collect()
See how pretty it is, simple beauty, fully expressive, just like a sentence
:)
as oppose to
  when forall Cloth ( dried ) AND exists Cloth() then collect() X(

Nah, I guess people can live with that :P



--
View this message in context: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/forall-is-satisfied-when-there-is-nothing-tp4027553p4027598.html
Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.