>From the README file:
Note that a not pattern cannot contain any variables that are not bound
before that pattern (since a not pattern does not match any facts, it
cannot
be used to define the values of any variables!) You can use blank
variables, however (a blank variable is a bare ? or $?). A not pattern
can similarly
not have a pattern binding.
---------
Wouldn't it be useful to allow named variables in the not pattern, as
it is in clips? For instance
(defrule not-two-same
(a ?x)
(not (b ?y ?y&~?x))
=>
(printout t ?x clrf))
It can of course be rewritten into a set of other rules, but it the code
of
the rulebase becomes more hard to read...
What are the major problems with implementing not-expressions as in
clips?
(multiple facts, variables, etc?)
Could the fact that 'not' is not completely implemented be the reason
that
jess could outperform CLIPS when it was jit-compiled?
-------
BTW, I downloaded b4 today and it seems to work great! I just had to
change java code that uses putAtom and that a userfunction now returns
a string with its name from name(), instead of the atom table index as
before.
Great! Thanks a millon!
/Lars Rasmusson
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, send the words 'unsubscribe jess-users [EMAIL PROTECTED]'
in the BODY of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED], NOT to the
list. List problems? Notify [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
