[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [sarif] Change draft for #46 (graphs)
Thank you Luke. I propose that we vote on #46 as it stands tomorrow, just to get the bulk of the graph representation in the books. BUT THEN: I will file an issue to represent nested graphs. I have an idea for how to do this, which I was just telling Michael about on the phone just now. I’ll send it along later this afternoon. Larry From: sarif@lists.oasis-open.org <sarif@lists.oasis-open.org> On Behalf Of Luke Cartey I think there are some plausible use cases for true nested graphs, not just interlinked graphs. In particular, it gives you the ability to describe hierarchical relationships between sub-graphs, which can be useful when it comes to displaying results. As an example, if we have a sub-graph for representing each method in a class, containing the data flow nodes within that method, then it is quite natural to nest those graphs inside a graph representing the containing class, and further nest that graph within a graph containing all the classes in a namespace etc. This can be helpful for displaying large or complicated graphs, as the sub-graphs can be expanded or collapsed at different levels. Having said that, I don't believe that this is a critical addition for CSD.1, as long as whatever graph mechanism we provide would be easy to extend at a later point to support graph nesting. I think the current proposal looks reasonable in this regard. Cheers, Luke On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 10:28 PM Larry Golding <larrygolding@comcast.net> wrote:
|
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]