30 Apr
2011
30 Apr
'11
11:42 p.m.
Hi,
On 1 May 2011, at 00:25, Alexandre Bergel wrote:
Hi!
I often bump into a problem having the following gist:
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
view nodes: #( $a $b $a).
view edgesFromAssociations: { $a -> $b . $b -> $a}
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
How can I express the the second $a and not the first when defining edges? I have the
impression this limitation comes from the fact that two different nodes have the same
model behind ($a), and there is no way to distinguish between them.
Yes. But that is not a limitation, it is a feature that comes from the following idea: we
want by default the user to manipulate the domain objects, not the graph model. This is
why the edges* selectors provide a lookup based on the heuristic that a domain object will
appear only once in the graph.
An easy and backward compatible solution would be to
permit to provide nodes:
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
nodes := view nodes: #( $a $b $a).
view edgesFromAssociations: { nodes first -> nodes second . nodes second -> nodes
third }
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Opinion?
Well, edges* selectors are meant to be used as transformations as explained above. For
direct edges, we should use another class. I would suggest:
- directEdges
- rawEdges
Cheers,
Doru
Cheers,
Alexandre
--
_,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:
Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu
^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
--
www.tudorgirba.com
"We can create beautiful models in a vacuum.
But, to get them effective we have to deal with the inconvenience of reality."