[Haskell-cafe] ANNOUNCE: graphviz-29126.96.36.199
Ivan Lazar Miljenovic
ivan.miljenovic at gmail.com
Sun Jul 19 04:13:52 EDT 2009
Two clarifications I'd like to add to my previous announcement (both of
which were prompted by Zsolt :p ):
1. Some Attribute values take something like (Either Bool String); this
is used when upstream indicates that two different types of values
are allowed. Typically in this kind of situation, the allowed String
values are limited to a few specific values, so the usage of Either
typically indicates that they should be replaced with a custom value
2. When considering the new representation of DotGraph, this isn't
limited to just people who wish to parse Dot code: if you want to do
anything out of the ordinary/fancy, then unfortunately you will need
this imperative usage (as the indicated way to have global attributes
to a graph but not to its subgraphs is to list all the subgraphs, and
then define the graph attribute).
For an example of this, consider the layout of Andy Gill's dotgen
library . If you look at the internals, he does consider graphs
to be a list of statements. This amongst other things allows him to
have a monadic interface for building graphs with much greater
flexibility in what you can do, whereas graphviz limits you to either
converting a pre-existing graph or else creating one within the
limits of specifying it as a list of global attributes, a list of
nodes/clusters and a list of edges between the nodes.
What I'm considering is that if I internally represent DotGraph as a
list of statements, then I will have getNodes and getEdges functions
to extract the nodes and edges (with their attributes) out. This
also simplifies some of the definitions, as a subgraph/cluster is
then also just a list of statements.
Zsolt Dollenstein <zsol.zso.l at gmail.com> writes:
> On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 10:23 AM, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic <
> ivan.miljenovic at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I am pleased to announce a new release of the graphviz package for
>> Haskell, which provides bindings to the GraphViz  suite of tools.
> Nice work!
> As the way of defining an attribute for a specific grouping of
> nodes/edges/subgraphs is to have them all listed after the attribute
>> definition (whereas those beforehand do not have this attribute), the
>> imperative nature of the Dot language does not allow us to split these
>> statements up as we currently do.
>>  http://graphviz.org/doc/info/lang.html
>> As such, I'm asking which of the following two choices people would
>> 1. Follow upstream so that it can fully parse a Dot graph
>> 2. Keep it as it is, so that it is possible to consider all edges,
>> etc. easily.
> I would vote for the second one since I think that is the most widely used
> feature of this package.
Ivan Lazar Miljenovic
Ivan.Miljenovic at gmail.com
More information about the Haskell-Cafe