I was two fast on my reply before as I did have a question for you Valentyn on this statement:
*I would propose to consider adding `startWith`, `endWith` andmaybe `contains` string functions.* How would you see these steps being used differently than the current predicates? i.e. P.startingWith()/endingWith()/containing() Dave On Fri, Feb 17, 2023 at 7:12 AM David Bechberger <d...@bechberger.com> wrote: > Thank you for the fixes Valentyn, I've incorporated that PR. > > The list I proposed here was a minimum number of functions, so we can > definitely see what it would take to include something like a string > formatting function. > > Dave > > On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 8:36 AM Valentyn Kahamlyk > <valent...@bitquilltech.com.invalid> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Dave, thank you for the detailed proposal! >> >> I made small PR with naming fixes: >> https://github.com/apache/tinkerpop/pull/1973, please take a look. >> >> Also I would propose to consider adding `startWith`, `endWith` and >> maybe `contains` string functions. >> >> Another interesting feature to keep in mind is string formatting. >> for example >> `g.V(1).values('first_name').concat(' ').concat(V(1).values('last_name')` >> can be simplified as >> `g.V(1).asString('%s %s', values('first_name'), values('last_name'))` >> >> Regards, Valentyn >> >> >> On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 8:47 AM David Bechberger <d...@bechberger.com> >> wrote: >> >> > My apologies, I just saw that I didn't include a link in that email. >> The >> > proposal is here: >> > >> > >> > >> https://github.com/apache/tinkerpop/blob/proposal_3/docs/src/dev/future/proposal-3-remove-closures.asciidoc >> > >> > Dave >> > >> > On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 7:09 AM David Bechberger <d...@bechberger.com> >> > wrote: >> > >> > > Hi All, >> > > >> > > There are a number of useful operations that Gremlin users often wish >> to >> > > perform that are not provided today in the form of traversal steps or >> > > predicates (P/TextP). For historical reasons these functions were >> omitted >> > > and users were able to accomplish these tasks by specifying anonymous >> > code >> > > blocks or “closures” to perform these tasks. For example, below is an >> > > example of how you can achieve a case-insensitive search for any >> cities >> > > that contain “Miami”. >> > > >> > > g.V().hasLabel('city'). >> > > >> > > >> > >> has('name',filter{it.get().toLowerCase().contains('Miami'.toLowerCase())}) >> > > >> > > While this is a powerful fallback mechanism in Gremlin to handle use >> > cases >> > > where there is no functionality within the Gremlin language to meet >> the >> > > requirements. However, for a variety of reasons such as security and >> > > performance, many/most remote providers of TinkerPop do not allow >> users >> > to >> > > execute closures as part of a query. This leaves users with a >> problem, as >> > > the mechanism provided to solve these sorts of use cases is not >> allowed. >> > I >> > > have come up with a proposed framework for removing the need for >> closures >> > > by adding the most commonly requested functions as new Gremlin steps. >> > > Below is a proposal to highlight this and propose a first set of these >> > > steps for string manipulation, list manipulation, and data >> manipulation. >> > > >> > > What are your thoughts on this approach? >> > > Any items we missed? >> > > Concerns? >> > > >> > > Thanks, >> > > Dave >> > > >> > >> >
