[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [sarif] Nested graphs: adopting Luke's proposal
JSON arrays provide a length member, yes? So to efficiently determine whether the nested graph terminates internally or steps back into the current graph, the viewer only needs to consult the final edge in the nested graph edge array to
see whether it returns to the current graph. i.e., a constant time look-up rather than by N of nested graph edges. My browser test of a JSON snippet shows that length is a valid property of an array. Of course, someone needs to traverse the collection at least once to produce this value. But edge array consumers shouldn’t need to duplicate that work
in order to provide step-over behavior, unless I’m missing something. Michael From: sarif@lists.oasis-open.org <sarif@lists.oasis-open.org>
On Behalf Of Larry Golding (Comcast) My sense of the TC’s discussion on nested graphs, combined with the attached thread, is that Luke’s “nested graphs” proposal has these advantages:
My “nested traversals” proposal has, AFAIK, only one advantage:
Based on this, I’m going to produce a change draft that removes nested traversals and implements Luke’s nested graphs proposal. Please speak up if you disagree. Larry |
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]