5 ms·
A DAG isn't a tree. It's acyclical wrt the direction of the edges. Since this basically is an outliner, the name (or title of the submission) is misleading.
by stewbrew 7y ago
A DAG isn't a tree. It's acyclical wrt the direction of the edges. Since this basically is an outliner, the name (or title of the submission) is misleading.
- zeckalpha 7y agoI’m not seeing how DAGs are distinct from forests (sets of trees) or outlines. They seem topologically equivalent.
- wolfgang42 7y agoDAGs can have things that would form cycles if they weren't directed, like diamond shapes.
- seanhunter 7y agoWhich this can also have. One concrete action could contribute to two intermediate goals which in turn could both contribute to one parent high-level goal (giving a diamond).
- DaveWM 7y agoThat's exactly right. Each intention can have multiple parents, which I believe makes the topology a DAG. The only constraints are that you must have exactly 1 root node, each node must have at least 1 parent (apart from the root node), and that you can't have cycles.
- stewbrew 7y agoOk, I missed that.
- tejtm 7y agodags are trees that can share non-root nodes
- swiley 7y agoLevel n nodes can have arcs to level n-m nodes provided they aren’t ancestors. In addition nodes can have multiple parents.
- zeckalpha 7y agoSo can trees. File systems do this all the time.
- swiley 7y agoMost file systems aren’t trees, most are some more flexible graph. You can get away thinking of them like trees as long as you’re not writing a correct program. (see also: links, bind mounts) Trees have a formal definition that precludes this, that’s why we call them trees and not graphs.