It is virtually always better to do all your tests on the LHSs of your
rules. For a rule with one one CE, like this one, it doesn't matter
much, but for a rule like
(defrule good (A ?a&:(eq ?a nothing)) (B ?b) (C ?c) => ...)
(defrule bad (A ?a) (B ?b) (C ?c) => (if (eq ?a nothing ) ...)
the difference can be huge. Making "good" faster than "bad" is, in fact,
the whole point of the Rete algorithm.
I think Christo Andonyadis wrote:
>
> Which is better/faster:
>
> (something ?s)
> =>
> (if (eq ?s nothing) then
> (assert (somethingelse nothingatall))
> )
>
> OR
>
> (something ?s&:(eq ?s nothing))
> =>
> (assert (somethingelse nothingatall))
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, send the words 'unsubscribe jess-users [EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> in the BODY of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED], NOT to the
> list. List problems? Notify [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------
Ernest Friedman-Hill
Distributed Systems Research Phone: (925) 294-2154
Sandia National Labs FAX: (925) 294-2234
Org. 8920, MS 9214 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PO Box 969 http://herzberg.ca.sandia.gov
Livermore, CA 94550
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, send the words 'unsubscribe jess-users [EMAIL PROTECTED]'
in the BODY of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED], NOT to the
list. List problems? Notify [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
