[rules-users] Existensial not question

[wasabifan]

That is great news.  I misunderstood the behavior of the "exists" and "not". 
I thought it would only fire once, period.  It wasn't a problem with our
limitted test data, but I was thinking it would be a problem once we tested
with large fact sets.  

Thanks Edson!


Edson Tirelli-3 wrote:
> 
>    Bryan,
> 
>    I'm not sure I completely understood your scenario, but Drools supports
> FOL and your scenario can be implemented whatever it is.
> 
>    I think the best way is giving you some examples:
> 
> rule "Fires FOR EACH fact that does not have a corresponding Exception
> Range"
>   when
>     Fact1($number : number)
>     not ExceptionRange(startRange <= $number, stopRange >= $number)
>   then
>     // do something
> end
> 
> 
> 

-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Existensial-not-question-tf4481066.html#a12782071
Sent from the drools - user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.