If you really want to go out and collect the gladrags from the clothesline you'd have to get a grip on them, i.e., their references. And that's why, in the context presented by the OP, most applications that really mean business will write this anyway:
$s: Set( size > 0 ) from collect( Cloth(dried) ) -W On 08/01/2014, Davide Sottara <dso...@gmail.com> wrote: > The "all and some" combination is actually quite popular and might > be implemented at some point. By no means it is the only possibility > to enhance the expressivity of the language: > http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/generalized-quantifiers/ > > > On 01/08/2014 01:50 PM, Sonata wrote: >> Davide Sottara wrote >>> This is actually the way it is implemented internally, and no, I don't >>> think that >>> it would be appropriate to change it. >> Yes I agree, so may be we users actually do not need forall, but *every*, >> which just means forall and exists >> Now, look at it again: >> when every Cloth( dried ) then collect() >> See how pretty it is, simple beauty, fully expressive, just like a >> sentence >> :) >> as oppose to >> when forall Cloth ( dried ) AND exists Cloth() then collect() X( >> >> Nah, I guess people can live with that :P >> >> >> >> -- >> View this message in context: >> http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/forall-is-satisfied-when-there-is-nothing-tp4027553p4027598.html >> Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> _______________________________________________ >> 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