Wolfgang Laun wrote: > On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 12:41 PM, Simon Thum <simon.t...@gmx.de> wrote: >> Personally, I look at it like: >> >> stateless -> propositional logic >> stateful -> first-order logic >> > > This is a false proposition ;-) > > 'not', 'exists' and 'forall' - Drools' support for first-order logic > quantifiers - is > fully available (such as all the other features for LHS) in a stateless > session. Thanks for the clarification. So stateless _uses_ state but just doesn't have it bound to the session?
If that's true, is there a deeper sense behind StatelessSession not supporting agenda arbitration? IOW, should I reasonably be able to cook up a "SomewhatStatelessSessionWithAgendaSupport", or would I end up with a half-arsed StatefulSession ? > > -W > >> I'm not sure that's 100% true though. In any case, it depends on the >> kind of questions you like to ask. If you're not sure, test it. >> Cheers, >> >> Simon >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > _______________________________________________ rules-users mailing list rules-users@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
