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 <[email protected]> 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
> [email protected]
> https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user
>
_______________________________________________
Neo4j mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user
