Re: [rules-dev] Drools syntax diagrams - redrawn

Yes, and I don't think we want to take readability cues from Perl. :) GreG On Sep 23, 2010, at 3:03, Wolfgang Laun <wolfgang.laun(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: On 23 September 2010 09:31, Bruno Unna < <bruno.unna(a)gmail.com&gt; bruno.unna(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > FWIW: in Perl, there are both operators as well (|| and 'or'). However, > they are *not* exactly the same. Although they can be used in any context to > render a boolean expression, their priority makes the difference. Taken from > official documentation ( <http://bit.ly/dgw4GT>http://bit.ly/dgw4GT): > > Low precedence "and", "or", "xor" were introduced to permit "Perl poetry", or, more seriously, to permit control flow using a logical expression, especially after function calls without parentheses. see Naples or die; # same as: see(Napes) || die(); but not: see(Naples || die() ); No way this makes any sense in Drools. -W Binary "or" returns the logical disjunction of the two surrounding > expressions. It's equivalent to || except for the very low precedence. This > makes it useful for control flow. > > > Nonetheless, it must be taken into account that the distinction makes > sense for a Perl programmer. For a rules-writing guy (or girl) perhaps the > distinction is extremely obscure. > > Regards. > > > _______________________________________________ rules-dev mailing list rules-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev _______________________________________________ rules-dev mailing list rules-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev