Hello, To extend on Kuppitz' comment -- Yes, MatchWhereStrategy folds in where()-clauses. Note that with the recent work on XMatchStep (if we go with that for GA), where() clauses work natively in XMatchStep and we will also just fold any "right handed" where()-clauses into match() as well.
Marko. http://markorodriguez.com On Jun 17, 2015, at 3:04 PM, Daniel Kuppitz <[email protected]> wrote: > After actually looking into the docs, I decided to keep the example, since > the description explicitely states, that in such a case the where() clause > will automatically be folded into match(): > > The where()-step can take either a BiPredicate (first example below) or a >> Traversal (second example below). Using MatchWhereStrategy, where()-clauses >> can be automatically folded into match() and thus, subject to match()-steps >> budget-match algorithm. >> > > The sample then shows, that > > g.V().match('a', > __.as('a').out('created').as('b'), > __.as('b').in('created').as('c')). > where(__.as('a').out('knows').as('c')). > select('a','c').by('name') > > > is - after the MatchWhereStrategy was applied (this is done automatically) > - in fact the same thing as: > > g.V().match('a', > __.as('a').out('created').as('b'), > __.as('a').out('knows').as('c'), > __.as('b').in('created').as('c')). > select('a','c').by('name') > > .... > > Cheers, > Daniel > > > On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 10:47 PM, Daniel Kuppitz <[email protected]> wrote: > >> You're right. It's actually a pretty good example for where(), but not >> for match()/where(). I will remove it and make sure that we have >> something similar in the where() sample section. Something like: >> >> g.V().as("a").out("created").as("b").in("created").as("c"). >> where(__as("a").out("knows").as("c")).select().by("name") >> >> >> Cheers, >> Daniel >> >> >> On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 8:43 PM, Matthias Broecheler <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi guys, >>> >>> looking at the second example in the following section of the docs I >>> noticed a semantic overlap between match and where: >>> http://www.tinkerpop.com/docs/3.0.0-SNAPSHOT/#using-where-with-match >>> >>> traversal = g.V().match('a', __.as('a').out('created').as('b'), __.as('b' >>> ).in('created').as('c')). where(__.as('a').out('knows').as('c')). >>> select('a' >>> ,'c').by('name'); >>> >>> The provided where clause could also have been folded into the actual >>> traversal to yield the same result. >>> I wonder: >>> 1) Is there a way to avoid this ambiguity? >>> 2) or should we simply not promote it in the docs. As the docs are >>> currently written I am worried that users might get confused as to how >>> match steps are supposed to be written. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Matthias >>> >> >>
