ooperation.*
>
>
>
> *From:* rules-users-boun...@lists.jboss.org [mailto:
> rules-users-boun...@lists.jboss.org] *On Behalf Of *miguel machado
> *Sent:* Thursday, May 06, 2010 4:19 AM
> *To:* Rules Users List
> *Subject:* Re: [rules-users] Bug in "not" ???
>
>
Rules Users List
Subject: Re: [rules-users] Bug in "not" ???
This is not entirely true: you may have different objects in memory in such a
way that both fires rule. In this case, if you had two (or more!)
AccountHolders for the same Employment, each of those having different
BusinessNa
This is not entirely true: you may have different objects in memory in such
a way that both fires rule. In this case, if you had two (or more!)
AccountHolders for the same Employment, each of those having different
BusinessName's associated, both rules (with and without the 'not') would
fire.
Does
Using Drools Expert 5.0.1
The following rule fires both when the "not" is there, and also if the "not" is
commented out. Clearly, both cannot be true, so there is something wrong
somewhere.
I've narrowed it down to the testing of the $parentEmploymentId declaration -
the AccountHolder CE, whic
