Re: [Neo4j] zero fromDepth and toDepth
Done, enjoy! https://github.com/neo4j/community/issues/80 Cheers, /peter neubauer GTalk: neubauer.peter Skype peter.neubauer Phone +46 704 106975 LinkedIn http://www.linkedin.com/in/neubauer Twitter http://twitter.com/peterneubauer http://www.neo4j.org - NOSQL for the Enterprise. http://startupbootcamp.org/- Öresund - Innovation happens HERE. On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 10:08 PM, Peter Neubauer peter.neuba...@neotechnology.com wrote: We can do this after 1.5. Cheers, /peter neubauer GTalk: neubauer.peter Skype peter.neubauer Phone +46 704 106975 LinkedIn http://www.linkedin.com/in/neubauer Twitter http://twitter.com/peterneubauer http://www.neo4j.org - NOSQL for the Enterprise. http://startupbootcamp.org/- Öresund - Innovation happens HERE. On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 12:28 PM, Mattias Persson matt...@neotechnology.com wrote: Sure, but implementations using it will break then. Maybe not this close to release? hard decision. 2011/11/3 Peter Neubauer peter.neuba...@neotechnology.com So, do we fix the implementation to match (see https://github.com/neo4j/community/issues/80) or adjust the JavaDoc? I kinda think it makes sense to change the code, have written tests for it. Cheers, /peter neubauer GTalk: neubauer.peter Skype peter.neubauer Phone +46 704 106975 LinkedIn http://www.linkedin.com/in/neubauer Twitter http://twitter.com/peterneubauer http://www.neo4j.org - NOSQL for the Enterprise. http://startupbootcamp.org/- Öresund - Innovation happens HERE. On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 12:21 AM, Mattias Persson matt...@neotechnology.com wrote: Right, the toDepth implementation isn't matching the javadoc and it is a bit confusing. 2011/11/3 Alex a...@auv.name Done: http://neo4jdb.lighthouseapp.com/projects/77609-neo4j-community/tickets/17-consisnte-behavior-of-fromdepth-todepth-and-atdepth there's a typo in the title... time to get some sleep :) Alex -- View this message in context: http://neo4j-community-discussions.438527.n3.nabble.com/zero-fromDepth-and-toDepth-tp3474825p3476080.html Sent from the Neo4j Community Discussions mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Neo4j mailing list User@lists.neo4j.org https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user -- Mattias Persson, [matt...@neotechnology.com] Hacker, Neo Technology www.neotechnology.com ___ Neo4j mailing list User@lists.neo4j.org https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user ___ Neo4j mailing list User@lists.neo4j.org https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user -- Mattias Persson, [matt...@neotechnology.com] Hacker, Neo Technology www.neotechnology.com ___ Neo4j mailing list User@lists.neo4j.org https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user ___ Neo4j mailing list User@lists.neo4j.org https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user
Re: [Neo4j] zero fromDepth and toDepth
Right, the toDepth implementation isn't matching the javadoc and it is a bit confusing. 2011/11/3 Alex a...@auv.name Done: http://neo4jdb.lighthouseapp.com/projects/77609-neo4j-community/tickets/17-consisnte-behavior-of-fromdepth-todepth-and-atdepth there's a typo in the title... time to get some sleep :) Alex -- View this message in context: http://neo4j-community-discussions.438527.n3.nabble.com/zero-fromDepth-and-toDepth-tp3474825p3476080.html Sent from the Neo4j Community Discussions mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Neo4j mailing list User@lists.neo4j.org https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user -- Mattias Persson, [matt...@neotechnology.com] Hacker, Neo Technology www.neotechnology.com ___ Neo4j mailing list User@lists.neo4j.org https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user
Re: [Neo4j] zero fromDepth and toDepth
So, do we fix the implementation to match (see https://github.com/neo4j/community/issues/80) or adjust the JavaDoc? I kinda think it makes sense to change the code, have written tests for it. Cheers, /peter neubauer GTalk: neubauer.peter Skype peter.neubauer Phone +46 704 106975 LinkedIn http://www.linkedin.com/in/neubauer Twitter http://twitter.com/peterneubauer http://www.neo4j.org - NOSQL for the Enterprise. http://startupbootcamp.org/ - Öresund - Innovation happens HERE. On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 12:21 AM, Mattias Persson matt...@neotechnology.com wrote: Right, the toDepth implementation isn't matching the javadoc and it is a bit confusing. 2011/11/3 Alex a...@auv.name Done: http://neo4jdb.lighthouseapp.com/projects/77609-neo4j-community/tickets/17-consisnte-behavior-of-fromdepth-todepth-and-atdepth there's a typo in the title... time to get some sleep :) Alex -- View this message in context: http://neo4j-community-discussions.438527.n3.nabble.com/zero-fromDepth-and-toDepth-tp3474825p3476080.html Sent from the Neo4j Community Discussions mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Neo4j mailing list User@lists.neo4j.org https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user -- Mattias Persson, [matt...@neotechnology.com] Hacker, Neo Technology www.neotechnology.com ___ Neo4j mailing list User@lists.neo4j.org https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user ___ Neo4j mailing list User@lists.neo4j.org https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user
Re: [Neo4j] zero fromDepth and toDepth
Sure, but implementations using it will break then. Maybe not this close to release? hard decision. 2011/11/3 Peter Neubauer peter.neuba...@neotechnology.com So, do we fix the implementation to match (see https://github.com/neo4j/community/issues/80) or adjust the JavaDoc? I kinda think it makes sense to change the code, have written tests for it. Cheers, /peter neubauer GTalk: neubauer.peter Skype peter.neubauer Phone +46 704 106975 LinkedIn http://www.linkedin.com/in/neubauer Twitter http://twitter.com/peterneubauer http://www.neo4j.org - NOSQL for the Enterprise. http://startupbootcamp.org/- Öresund - Innovation happens HERE. On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 12:21 AM, Mattias Persson matt...@neotechnology.com wrote: Right, the toDepth implementation isn't matching the javadoc and it is a bit confusing. 2011/11/3 Alex a...@auv.name Done: http://neo4jdb.lighthouseapp.com/projects/77609-neo4j-community/tickets/17-consisnte-behavior-of-fromdepth-todepth-and-atdepth there's a typo in the title... time to get some sleep :) Alex -- View this message in context: http://neo4j-community-discussions.438527.n3.nabble.com/zero-fromDepth-and-toDepth-tp3474825p3476080.html Sent from the Neo4j Community Discussions mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Neo4j mailing list User@lists.neo4j.org https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user -- Mattias Persson, [matt...@neotechnology.com] Hacker, Neo Technology www.neotechnology.com ___ Neo4j mailing list User@lists.neo4j.org https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user ___ Neo4j mailing list User@lists.neo4j.org https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user -- Mattias Persson, [matt...@neotechnology.com] Hacker, Neo Technology www.neotechnology.com ___ Neo4j mailing list User@lists.neo4j.org https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user
Re: [Neo4j] zero fromDepth and toDepth
We can do this after 1.5. Cheers, /peter neubauer GTalk: neubauer.peter Skype peter.neubauer Phone +46 704 106975 LinkedIn http://www.linkedin.com/in/neubauer Twitter http://twitter.com/peterneubauer http://www.neo4j.org - NOSQL for the Enterprise. http://startupbootcamp.org/ - Öresund - Innovation happens HERE. On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 12:28 PM, Mattias Persson matt...@neotechnology.com wrote: Sure, but implementations using it will break then. Maybe not this close to release? hard decision. 2011/11/3 Peter Neubauer peter.neuba...@neotechnology.com So, do we fix the implementation to match (see https://github.com/neo4j/community/issues/80) or adjust the JavaDoc? I kinda think it makes sense to change the code, have written tests for it. Cheers, /peter neubauer GTalk: neubauer.peter Skype peter.neubauer Phone +46 704 106975 LinkedIn http://www.linkedin.com/in/neubauer Twitter http://twitter.com/peterneubauer http://www.neo4j.org - NOSQL for the Enterprise. http://startupbootcamp.org/ - Öresund - Innovation happens HERE. On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 12:21 AM, Mattias Persson matt...@neotechnology.com wrote: Right, the toDepth implementation isn't matching the javadoc and it is a bit confusing. 2011/11/3 Alex a...@auv.name Done: http://neo4jdb.lighthouseapp.com/projects/77609-neo4j-community/tickets/17-consisnte-behavior-of-fromdepth-todepth-and-atdepth there's a typo in the title... time to get some sleep :) Alex -- View this message in context: http://neo4j-community-discussions.438527.n3.nabble.com/zero-fromDepth-and-toDepth-tp3474825p3476080.html Sent from the Neo4j Community Discussions mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Neo4j mailing list User@lists.neo4j.org https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user -- Mattias Persson, [matt...@neotechnology.com] Hacker, Neo Technology www.neotechnology.com ___ Neo4j mailing list User@lists.neo4j.org https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user ___ Neo4j mailing list User@lists.neo4j.org https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user -- Mattias Persson, [matt...@neotechnology.com] Hacker, Neo Technology www.neotechnology.com ___ Neo4j mailing list User@lists.neo4j.org https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user ___ Neo4j mailing list User@lists.neo4j.org https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user
[Neo4j] zero fromDepth and toDepth
Hi everybody when setting fromDepth and toDepth both at zero, like in the following code Traversal.description.breadthFirst .evaluator(Evaluators.fromDepth(0)) .evaluator(Evaluators.toDepth(0)) I'm expecting to get only the start node, but I don't. Am I missing anything? Thanks! Cheers Alex -- View this message in context: http://neo4j-community-discussions.438527.n3.nabble.com/zero-fromDepth-and-toDepth-tp3474825p3474825.html Sent from the Neo4j Community Discussions mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Neo4j mailing list User@lists.neo4j.org https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user
Re: [Neo4j] zero fromDepth and toDepth
Alex,
looking at the source, the Evaluators.toDepth() does:
public static Evaluator toDepth( final int depth )
{
return new Evaluator()
{
public Evaluation evaluate( Path path )
{
return path.length() depth ?
Evaluation.INCLUDE_AND_CONTINUE : Evaluation.INCLUDE_AND_PRUNE;
}
};
}
So it won't work. However, question is if it should be inclusive or
not. WDYAT? I could change it to
return path.length() = depth ? Evaluation.INCLUDE_AND_CONTINUE :
Evaluation.INCLUDE_AND_PRUNE;
Cheers,
/peter neubauer
GTalk: neubauer.peter
Skype peter.neubauer
Phone +46 704 106975
LinkedIn http://www.linkedin.com/in/neubauer
Twitter http://twitter.com/peterneubauer
http://www.neo4j.org - NOSQL for the Enterprise.
http://startupbootcamp.org/ - Öresund - Innovation happens HERE.
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 11:59 AM, Alex a...@auv.name wrote:
Hi everybody
when setting fromDepth and toDepth both at zero, like in the following code
Traversal.description.breadthFirst
.evaluator(Evaluators.fromDepth(0))
.evaluator(Evaluators.toDepth(0))
I'm expecting to get only the start node, but I don't. Am I missing
anything?
Thanks!
Cheers
Alex
--
View this message in context:
http://neo4j-community-discussions.438527.n3.nabble.com/zero-fromDepth-and-toDepth-tp3474825p3474825.html
Sent from the Neo4j Community Discussions mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
Neo4j mailing list
User@lists.neo4j.org
https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user
___
Neo4j mailing list
User@lists.neo4j.org
https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user
Re: [Neo4j] zero fromDepth and toDepth
What about
atDepth(0) ?
Michael
Am 03.11.2011 um 03:33 schrieb Peter Neubauer:
Alex,
looking at the source, the Evaluators.toDepth() does:
public static Evaluator toDepth( final int depth )
{
return new Evaluator()
{
public Evaluation evaluate( Path path )
{
return path.length() depth ?
Evaluation.INCLUDE_AND_CONTINUE : Evaluation.INCLUDE_AND_PRUNE;
}
};
}
So it won't work. However, question is if it should be inclusive or
not. WDYAT? I could change it to
return path.length() = depth ? Evaluation.INCLUDE_AND_CONTINUE :
Evaluation.INCLUDE_AND_PRUNE;
Cheers,
/peter neubauer
GTalk: neubauer.peter
Skype peter.neubauer
Phone +46 704 106975
LinkedIn http://www.linkedin.com/in/neubauer
Twitter http://twitter.com/peterneubauer
http://www.neo4j.org - NOSQL for the Enterprise.
http://startupbootcamp.org/- Öresund - Innovation happens HERE.
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 11:59 AM, Alex a...@auv.name wrote:
Hi everybody
when setting fromDepth and toDepth both at zero, like in the following code
Traversal.description.breadthFirst
.evaluator(Evaluators.fromDepth(0))
.evaluator(Evaluators.toDepth(0))
I'm expecting to get only the start node, but I don't. Am I missing
anything?
Thanks!
Cheers
Alex
--
View this message in context:
http://neo4j-community-discussions.438527.n3.nabble.com/zero-fromDepth-and-toDepth-tp3474825p3474825.html
Sent from the Neo4j Community Discussions mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
Neo4j mailing list
User@lists.neo4j.org
https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user
___
Neo4j mailing list
User@lists.neo4j.org
https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user
___
Neo4j mailing list
User@lists.neo4j.org
https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user
Re: [Neo4j] zero fromDepth and toDepth
Hi Peter it admittedly makes little sense to use fromDepth(0) toDepth(0) because there's obviously no need to run the query at all. Anyway, I'd expect a behavior consistent with, for example fromDepth(1) toDepth(1), which returns only nodes at depth 1 (if I'm not mistaken). So, I'd definitely modify the code for the sake of consistency. For the same reason, atDepth(0) should also return the start node. Cheers Alex -- View this message in context: http://neo4j-community-discussions.438527.n3.nabble.com/zero-fromDepth-and-toDepth-tp3474825p3476040.html Sent from the Neo4j Community Discussions mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Neo4j mailing list User@lists.neo4j.org https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user
Re: [Neo4j] zero fromDepth and toDepth
Well,
fromDepth is
public static Evaluator fromDepth( final int depth )
{
return new Evaluator()
{
public Evaluation evaluate( Path path )
{
return path.length() depth ?
Evaluation.EXCLUDE_AND_CONTINUE : Evaluation.INCLUDE_AND_CONTINUE;
}
};
}
So it is inclusive. Given these, fromDepth(1) toDepth(1) will not
return anything. Have not checked though. Feels like you have a point
there. Mattias, WDYT?
Also, atDepth(0) should return the start node?
public static Evaluator atDepth( final int depth )
{
return new Evaluator()
{
public Evaluation evaluate( Path path )
{
return path.length() depth ?
Evaluation.EXCLUDE_AND_CONTINUE : Evaluation.INCLUDE_AND_PRUNE;
}
};
}
/peter
Cheers,
/peter neubauer
GTalk: neubauer.peter
Skype peter.neubauer
Phone +46 704 106975
LinkedIn http://www.linkedin.com/in/neubauer
Twitter http://twitter.com/peterneubauer
http://www.neo4j.org - NOSQL for the Enterprise.
http://startupbootcamp.org/ - Öresund - Innovation happens HERE.
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 7:51 PM, Alex a...@auv.name wrote:
Hi Peter
it admittedly makes little sense to use fromDepth(0) toDepth(0) because
there's obviously no need to run the query at all. Anyway, I'd expect a
behavior consistent with, for example fromDepth(1) toDepth(1), which
returns only nodes at depth 1 (if I'm not mistaken). So, I'd definitely
modify the code for the sake of consistency. For the same reason, atDepth(0)
should also return the start node.
Cheers
Alex
--
View this message in context:
http://neo4j-community-discussions.438527.n3.nabble.com/zero-fromDepth-and-toDepth-tp3474825p3476040.html
Sent from the Neo4j Community Discussions mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
Neo4j mailing list
User@lists.neo4j.org
https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user
___
Neo4j mailing list
User@lists.neo4j.org
https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user
Re: [Neo4j] zero fromDepth and toDepth
That sounds a bit bizarre: in my code, fromDepth(n) toDepth(n) seems to be working like atDepth(n) if n0 (that's what should be happening, isn't it?) Alex -- View this message in context: http://neo4j-community-discussions.438527.n3.nabble.com/zero-fromDepth-and-toDepth-tp3474825p3476058.html Sent from the Neo4j Community Discussions mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Neo4j mailing list User@lists.neo4j.org https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user
Re: [Neo4j] zero fromDepth and toDepth
Mmmh, let me do a testcase on this ... can you raise an issue? Cheers, /peter neubauer GTalk: neubauer.peter Skype peter.neubauer Phone +46 704 106975 LinkedIn http://www.linkedin.com/in/neubauer Twitter http://twitter.com/peterneubauer http://www.neo4j.org - NOSQL for the Enterprise. http://startupbootcamp.org/ - Öresund - Innovation happens HERE. On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 8:04 PM, Alex a...@auv.name wrote: That sounds a bit bizarre: in my code, fromDepth(n) toDepth(n) seems to be working like atDepth(n) if n0 (that's what should be happening, isn't it?) Alex -- View this message in context: http://neo4j-community-discussions.438527.n3.nabble.com/zero-fromDepth-and-toDepth-tp3474825p3476058.html Sent from the Neo4j Community Discussions mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Neo4j mailing list User@lists.neo4j.org https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user ___ Neo4j mailing list User@lists.neo4j.org https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user
Re: [Neo4j] zero fromDepth and toDepth
Done: http://neo4jdb.lighthouseapp.com/projects/77609-neo4j-community/tickets/17-consisnte-behavior-of-fromdepth-todepth-and-atdepth there's a typo in the title... time to get some sleep :) Alex -- View this message in context: http://neo4j-community-discussions.438527.n3.nabble.com/zero-fromDepth-and-toDepth-tp3474825p3476080.html Sent from the Neo4j Community Discussions mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Neo4j mailing list User@lists.neo4j.org https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user
