From: widi (zelephoeck_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-09-20 00:07:27
----- Original Message -----
From: jeremy siek <jsiek_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 1:27 AM
Subject: Re: [boost] Graph stuff
> David Abrahams writes:
> > Isn't it really there to make up for lack of template template
> > If so, I would hesitate to use the same convention for weight, which
> > never be a TTP.
> Right, they are used to replace TTPs.
> > property<int, edge_weight> // nobody puts weights on nodes anyway
> > property<int, edge_color> // I realize there are some orthogonality
> > issues here...
> > property<int, node_color> // ...but it may actually make the
> > of the graph a lot clearer
> > Any of these things strike your fancy or set off a spark?
> This last suggestion strikes my fancy. Something that has been bugging
> me is that it is hard to tell by looking at an adjacency_list typedef
> whether a plugin was being used for a vertex or edge plugin. Having
> "edge" or "vertex" in the name certainly makes this stand out.
> typedef adjacency_list<
> mapS, vecS, bidirectionalS,
> property<default_color_type, vertex_color,
> property<int, vertex_in_degree> >,
> property<int, edge_weight>
> > Graph;
> The orthogonality issue is not a big deal. They are just empty structs
> anyways, so having duplicates like edge_color and vertex_color is ok
> (though in this case, nobody uses edge_color).
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk