Hi,
Check out this test that Matt Frantz added today:
g.V.as('a').out.as('a').out.as('a').select('a').by(unfold.name.fold)
Lets break this bad boy down:
gremlin> g.V().as('a').out().as('a').out().as('a').select('a')
==>[v[1], v[4], v[5]]
==>[v[1], v[4], v[3]]
gremlin>
g.V().as('a').out().as('a').out().as('a').select('a').by(unfold().values('name').fold())
==>[marko, josh, ripple]
==>[marko, josh, lop]
You can say, "why use select()? -- use path()."
gremlin> g.V().as('a').out().as('a').out().as('a').path()
==>[v[1], v[4], v[5]]
==>[v[1], v[4], v[3]]
gremlin> g.V().as('a').out().as('a').out().as('a').path().by('name')
==>[marko, josh, ripple]
==>[marko, josh, lop]
True, but two things -- you don't always want the full path (select() is like
"subpath") and second, you may have lists in your select() at other times (not
just path elements, e.g. select(local)).
gremlin>
g.V().as('a').out().as('a').out().as('a').path().by('name').next().getClass()
==>class org.apache.tinkerpop.gremlin.process.traversal.step.util.MutablePath
gremlin>
g.V().as('a').out().as('a').out().as('a').select('a').by(unfold().values('name').fold()).next().getClass()
==>class java.util.ArrayList
So…. lets stick with thinking about select(). I don't like
by(unfold.name.fold). That is brutal looking. How do we make it not so sucky?
by(local,'name') ?
………local is starting to get deep (permeating numerous steps)…. outE(local)
eek!…. Where are we going?
Thanks,
Marko.
http://markorodriguez.com
