On Tue, 2014-03-18 at 14:44:49 -0500, Derek Martin wrote:
> OK, I see how you're doing the DAG stuff.  I guess to see what I
> wanted to see, I would have needed to specify a more complicated
> graph, something like this:
> 
> 1 -> 2
> 2 -> 3
> 1 -> 4
> 4 -> 5
> 5 -> 6
> 6 -> 7
> 1 -> 8
> 3,7,8 -> 9
> 
> =8^)

The DAG sorting gives

   1 r F 2014-03-18 To AH 0.2K 1
   2 r F 2014-03-18 To AH 0.2K ├─>Re: 1 -> 2
   3 r F 2014-03-18 To AH 0.2K │ └─>Re: 2 -> 3
   4 r F 2014-03-18 To AH 0.2K ├───│>Re: 1 -> 4
   5 r F 2014-03-18 To AH 0.2K │   │└─>Re: 4 -> 5
   6 r F 2014-03-18 To AH 0.2K │   │  └─>Re: 5 -> 6
   7 r F 2014-03-18 To AH 0.2K │   │    └─>Re: 6 -> 7
   8 r F 2014-03-18 To AH 0.2K └───│──────│>Re: 1 -> 8
   9   F 2014-03-18 To AH 0.2K     └──────┴┴─>Re: 3, 7, 8 -> 9

compared to the standard tree view

   1 r F 2014-03-18 To AH 0.2K 1
   2 r F 2014-03-18 To AH 0.2K ├─>Re: 1 -> 4
   3 r F 2014-03-18 To AH 0.2K │ └─>Re: 4 -> 5
   4 r F 2014-03-18 To AH 0.2K │   └─>Re: 5 -> 6
   5 r F 2014-03-18 To AH 0.2K │     └─>Re: 6 -> 7
   6 r F 2014-03-18 To AH 0.2K ├─>Re: 1 -> 8
   7 r F 2014-03-18 To AH 0.2K └─>Re: 1 -> 2
   8 r F 2014-03-18 To AH 0.2K   └─>Re: 2 -> 3
   9   F 2014-03-18 To AH 0.2K     └─>Re: 3, 7, 8 -> 9


Regards

Anders

Reply via email to