On Oct 31, 2008, at 12:11 PM, Wolfgang Laun wrote:
it's very well-documented behavior duplicated exactly from CLIPS. FOr
example, in section 6.5 of the Jess 7.1 manual:
Suitably touché'd, I seize the (admittedly petty) opportunity to
correct
you: it's section 6.10 ;-)
So it is... :)
But since we rely on computers to remind us of anything from a to z,
wouldn't it be nice if Jess
would complain if there is no initial-fact to insert? Or is there some
convincing reason to not
have it?
I had never thought about adding a warning. I've considered starting
working memory out in the already-reset state, but haven't because it
would change the semantics of some programs. Is there a good reason
not to make that warning from "run"? Not really, not that I can think
of. Seems like a reasonable idea.
---------------------------------------------------------
Ernest Friedman-Hill
Informatics & Decision Sciences, Sandia National Laboratories
PO Box 969, MS 9012, Livermore, CA 94550
http://www.jessrules.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, send the words 'unsubscribe jess-users [EMAIL PROTECTED]'
in the BODY of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED], NOT to the list
(use your own address!) List problems? Notify [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
