On 10/15/2019 6:47 AM, Jason Cobb wrote:
On 10/15/19 1:01 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
But are the dependencies you've identified truly circular? Many rules have
multiple independent clauses that could very well be separated into smaller
rules. If the "circularity" is created by a link to two entirely separate
clauses within a rule, that could easily be separated without any change of
function, is it really a circular reference to be concerned about?
-G.
Sure, that would be a valid solution for most of the cycles. Honestly, I
just thought it would be something interesting to analyze and talk about
(and apparently it was), so I put it in. I'm not trying to say it's a crisis
or anything.
Oh I agree it's absolutely fascinating. I was just responding to your
specific comment on "avoiding circular dependencies" - if a rule reads
better overall by combining several clauses I don't think it's a concern
if that makes the graph circular at the rules-level. -G.
