hmmm.. in an eval it *should* work - I assume there is a compile error that mentions the L ?
well this should not be a problem in 3.2, but for 3.0.x we can certainly look at it if you have a unit test. A literal outside of an eval shouldn't be needed - as the type is inferenced from the facts automatically. On 2/3/07, Aziz Boxwala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Is there a way to create a long literal in a rule condition? Typing 30L results in a syntax error because of the L at the end. The error occurs even if I put this literal in eval. --Aziz _______________________________________________ rules-users mailing list rules-users@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
_______________________________________________ rules-users mailing list rules-users@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
