Yup, clojure.contrib.graph is really cool. I'm implementing some
pathfinding-stuff with it right now. The generic model (like using a
function for the edges) is simple to use and very powerful.
On Sat, Jul 3, 2010 at 4:08 AM, Chas Emerick wrote:
> Take a look at clojure.contrib.graph. It's very
Assuming no need for coordination, atoms are a fine substitute for
refs, but the structure should be similar to Laurent's example (thus
avoiding conflation of identity and state), namely the var (e.g., n0,
n1) should be an atom of a map containing atoms. E.g.,
user=> (defn set-in! [node in] (dosyn
This probably isn't the right way to do it, but it works:
user=> (def n0 {:in (atom ()) :out (atom '(#'n1))})
#'user/n0
user=> (def n1 {:in (atom '(#'n0)) :out (atom ())})
#'user/n1
user=> (swap! (:in n0) conj '#'n3)
((var n3))
user=> n0
{:in #, :out #}
user=> @(eval (first @(:in n1)))
{:in #, :o
Take a look at clojure.contrib.graph. It's very basic, but has a nice
generic model.
- Chas
On Jul 2, 2010, at 3:15 PM, Mate Toth wrote:
I'm building a directed graph library, where the nodes has "out" and
"in" fields. If I connect a node, let's say:
(node->node n0 n1)
then the node's field
I've also struggled with the same concepts in my head in the past.
One answer to try explain why it is not possible, is that if you do
that, you somehow try to conflate identity and state again.
When you write n0: in () out (n1) and n1 in(n0) out() , it seems to me
that when you write n0:in() out
I'm building a directed graph library, where the nodes has "out" and
"in" fields. If I connect a node, let's say:
(node->node n0 n1)
then the node's fields would be the following:
n0:
in: ()
out: (n1)
n1:
in: (n0)
out ()
My problem is that if I update n0 I could only add the old "instance"
to t
