Re: [rules-users] forall not delivering as expected
Edson hasa fixed this in trunk, so you could use the latest snapshot.
forall and its equivalent not(not(...)) are equally affected.
A not very elegant workaround would be using accumulate, counting the
non-matches
and testing the resulting Number with >0.
-W
On 26 November 2010 11:35, OlliSee <o.roess(a)seeburger.de> wrote:
Hi there,
I'm experiencing the same problem using Drools 5.1.1
Whats the status on this?
By the way. It also doesn't work the other way round with
not (exists(X(y != z)))
which is basically the same as
forall($x : X()
X(this == $x, y == z)
)
If this is still a problem, how can I surpass this to get expected results?
Thanks in advance.
Oliver
--
View this message in context:
http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/forall-not-delivering...
Sent from the Drools - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
Attachments:
- attachment.html (text/html — 1.8 KB)