On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 3:54 AM, derwisch < [email protected]> wrote:
> > > > On 7 Jul., 12:30, "Edward K. Ream" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > This would mean in order to restore uA's for relations, the members of > v.children > (currently v.t.children, if I read the code correcty) could be > extended to a list > of a vnode and a uA. This extension could be applied to either > v.t.children or > v.t.vnodeList, but not necessarily both ... v.t.vnodeList makes a bit > more sense > imho. As vnodeList seems to permeate the core code quite thoroughly, > however, > it really seems better to cancel my project and call it a day. I don't understand what you are trying to do, or how you want to do it, but I am sure that in the one-node world it will be possible. In particular, if you want to model back links in a general graph, putting those links in v.u will be much simpler in the one-node world than in any previous version of Leo. The v.parents list will replace v.t.vnodeList. Furthermore, there will be one entry in v.parents for every link to v. Gone are all the data-losing tests like: if v2 not in v.t.vnodeList: v.t.vnodeList.append(v2) Instead, the new code will be: v.parents.append(v2) This structure suffices to model any general graph. Leo's core restricts the graph to a dag, and Leo's iterators work only for dag's, but you could consider this merely a local optimization :-) 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
