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
