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

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-nothi... Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ rules-users mailing list rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users