I think I saw this, but now I can't find it.
3.0 won't support nesting "not" inside "and" and "or", nor will it support
nesting "and" and "or" inside "not". Is that correct?
Is the suggested workaround to establish the positive fact in wm, then have
a not rule for that fact at a lower salience, like:
rule "1"
when
(a and b) or c
then
// do something wormy
assert(worms_are_good);
end
rule "2" salience -10
when
not worms_are_good
then
// do something unwormy
end
I guess a similiar work around can be done for nesting not inside and/or:
have a rule that asserts the "not fact", then use the presence of the "not
fact" in another rule.
I'm coming across this a lot, since there is no "else". I understand and
agree with the argument against "else", but it seems inversing rules is not
always straightforward without nesting and/or/not.
