Re: [rules-users] doubt regarding FORALL and contains operator...

2009-02-03 Thread Edson Tirelli
Sudhir, As I said in my previous e-mail, in case 1, it is the expected behavior. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-order_logic If you want to ensure that there is at least one Vehicle AND for all Vehicles the model is bmw, write your rule as: when exists( Vehicle() ) forall( V

Re: [rules-users] doubt regarding FORALL and contains operator...

2009-02-03 Thread Sudhir M
Hi Edson, Thanks for a quick reply. Regarding the second second point I will open an issue in JIRA. Regarding the first one is that a bug as well? since I haven't assert any of the vehicle instances I suppose the rule shouldn't fire right? But the rule is firing always. Thanks, sudhir. On Tue

Re: [rules-users] doubt regarding FORALL and contains operator...

2009-02-03 Thread Edson Tirelli
Regarding 1, it is the expected behavior, since there is no vehicle in the wm whose model is not "bmw". Regarding 2, probably a bug. Can you please open a JIRA with a test case? []s Edson 2009/2/3 Sudhir M > Hi ALL, > We are using drools 4.0.7 for one of our projects. We encou