I'm sorry Mark I don't understand what you wrote. What are you referring to when you write 'the first', 'the second'?
-----Original Message----- From: Mark Proctor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, May 04, 2006 5:11 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [drools-user] DRL design of OR conditions in 3.1 we aim to allow age == 60 || age == 70 || age == 80 However the functionality will be different compared to condition 'or'. The first will create sub rules for all logical outcomes. The above notation creates a single rule and embeds that or logic in a an alpha node. I guess the different is the first doesn't short cut, the second does. Mark Christopher G. Stach II wrote: > I was wondering what the reasoning was behind DRLs requiring syntax > like > this: > > Person(sex == "f", age == 60) || > Person(sex == "f", age == 70) || > Person(sex == "f", age == 80) > > instead of like this: > > Person(sex == "f", age == 60 || age == 70 || age == 80) > > or even like this: > > Person(sex == "f", age IN ( 60, 70, 80 )) > >
