On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 9:08 AM, Terry Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Ah, now I understand the "two clones can share the same parent" bit, I > didn't get it until now. But is there anything, in the most general of > generalized graphs, that says you can't have two links between nodes? Not to my knowledge: general means general :-) However, afaik clones are not a part of traditional graph "lore". That is, we could say that clones simply are not an issue: any node could have multiple links into that node. But if we wanted to represent clones directly in a graph, we would need a notation that indicates that two apparently separate nodes are clones. Something like A == A. So this means that clones are something pretty special to Leo. > > It seems unified node world could just have B appear in A's children > list twice. Obviously there a limited reasons for doing this, > basically to support the usually transient state created by the Clone > Node function, and maybe to make an entry visible at two places in a > long list. But I don't see how it's a problem - it's working now, > basically. Correct. > > I think it's a shame unified node world isn't happening, because I > don't think the v/tnode system has any advantages and I think the > v/tnode system is much less intuitive. I am more sanguine. The recent "little" aha says that tnodes should be considered subsidiary. In other words, most users should be able to pretend they don't exist. That's not quite the case now. To make that a reality we could a) retire or deprecate the tnode iters, b) ensure that all tnode getters/setters have analogs in the position and/or vnode classes. With these changes in place, tnodes would be relegated to "hidden helper" status. > > Of course, if we get a sane p.stack and vnodes get parents and children > iterators that yield other vnodes we're basically there, is that how > things are going to fall out? Yes, a "sane" p.stack turns out to path to the graph world, and to much simpler code in leoNodes.py. You could call this one of the most important fallouts of all the recent chit-chat :-) However, as much as I like simple code, I shall be in no hurry to make this massive change to Leo's internals. It's not needed now because the graph world has lower priority than any of the present 4.5 projects. Edward --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "leo-editor" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
