Hi,
Moreover, I start having the feeling the {{WeightedGraph}} is a
useless interface: it is enough marking the vertices/edges as weighted
depending on the problem... or not? At the end of the day,
{{WeightedGraph}} does nothing than having the the edges marked as
weighted, so Dijkstra signature changed as:
<V extends Vertex, WE extends WeightedEdge, G extends DirectedGraph<V,
WE>> WeightedPath<V, WE> findShortestPath( G graph, V source, V
target )
still define well the input type, a graph wich relations are directed
edges and edges are weighted... WDYT?
I agree, as long as there are no specific features of the graph that are
independent on its vertices and edges.
quoting myself here: actually I think {{WeightedGraph}} should *not* go
away if it makes sense to add methods to it later (e.g. to get the total
weight). But changing the signature of the methods is still a valid
idea, as it allows for a more fine-grained expressiveness on the input.
Right?
Claudio
Another advantage: I won't bother
later to add more speficic interfaces like {{EdgeWeightedGraph}} or
{{VertexWeightedGraph}} ;-)
+1, please include that in a separate issue!
All the best, have a nice day!
Simo
Ciao,
Claudio
http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/
http://twitter.com/simonetripodi
http://www.99soft.org/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
--
Claudio Squarcella
PhD student at Roma Tre University
E-mail address: squar...@dia.uniroma3.it
Phone: +39-06-57333215
Fax: +39-06-57333612
http://www.dia.uniroma3.it/~squarcel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
