obsolete marker terminology
Pierre-Yves David
pierre-yves.david at ens-lyon.org
Wed Nov 20 17:38:50 UTC 2019
These terms are already used by the normal graph. So we cannot really
reuse them directly.
Are you suggesting we use:
- successors-parents,
- successors-descendants,
- predecessors-parents,
- predecessors-ancestors ?
On that topic, we started to talk about `evolution` to refer to the
various iteration over a changesets. So maybe:
- successor,
- evolution-child,
- evolution-parent,
- predecessor
?
On 11/19/19 9:39 AM, Paul Jackson wrote:
> On the page:
>
> https://www.mercurial-scm.org/doc/evolution/obs-terms.html
>
> the author notes:
>
>> I’m not very happy with this naming scheme and I’m looking for a
>> better distinction between direct successors and any successors.
>
> How about: ancestor and descendant, and (for the direct case) parent and
> child.
>
> This is in line with the directed graph terminology at:
>
> http://www-math.ucdenver.edu/~wcherowi/courses/m4408/glossary.html
>
> (If there was a better place for me to suggest this, I welcome the
> advice - thanks!)
>
> --
> Paul Jackson
> pj at usa.net
>
> _______________________________________________
> Evolve-testers mailing list
> Evolve-testers at mercurial-scm.org
> https://www.mercurial-scm.org/mailman/listinfo/evolve-testers
>
--
Pierre-Yves David
More information about the Evolve-testers
mailing list