Re: [rules-users] Stateless Vs Stateful Sessions in Webtier
Wolfgang Laun wrote:
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 12:41 PM, Simon Thum
<simon.thum(a)gmx.de> wrote:
> Personally, I look at it like:
>
> stateless -> propositional logic
> stateful -> first-order logic
>
This is a false proposition ;-)
'not', 'exists' and 'forall' - Drools' support for
first-order logic
quantifiers - is
fully available (such as all the other features for LHS) in a stateless session.
Thanks for the clarification. So stateless _uses_ state but just doesn't
have it bound to the session?
If that's true, is there a deeper sense behind StatelessSession not
supporting agenda arbitration?
IOW, should I reasonably be able to cook up a
"SomewhatStatelessSessionWithAgendaSupport", or would I end up with a
half-arsed StatefulSession ?
-W
> I'm not sure that's 100% true though. In any case, it depends on the
> kind of questions you like to ask. If you're not sure, test it.
> Cheers,
>
> Simon
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users