I think this makes good sense and improves the naming consistency.
Cheers,
Kelvin
On 2020/08/29 13:28:12, Stephen Mallette <s...@gmail.com> wrote:
> In 3.3.5 we introduced a more unified method to construct "g":>
>
> gremlin> g = traversal().withGraph(TinkerFactory.createModern())>
> ==>graphtraversalsource[tinkergraph[vertices:6 edges:6], standard]>
> gremlin> g = traversal().withRemote('conf/remote-graph.properties')>
> ==>graphtraversalsource[emptygraph[empty], standard]>
> gremlin> g =>
> traversal().withRemote(DriverRemoteConnection.using('localhost',8182))>
> ==>graphtraversalsource[emptygraph[empty], standard]>
>
> https://tinkerpop.apache.org/docs/3.4.8/upgrade/#_anonymoustraversalsource>
>
> I think that approach has been really helpful. Of course, this morning I>
> was thinking that withGraph(Graph) could be better named if we changed it>
> to withEmbedded(Graph) which would then make it explicit that there are two>
> modes of operation at play here in TinkerPop when you go to write your>
> Gremlin with "g".>
>
> You can (1) have a "embedded" graph for which you must have a local>
> instance available or (2) a "remote" graph for which you need a connection.>
>
> I was thinking we could deprecate withGraph() for withEmbedded() in 3.4.9>
> and drop withGraph() in 3.5.0. Anyone have any thoughts on that matter?>
>
Cheers,
Kelvin
Kelvin R. Lawrence
Round Rock, Texas, U.S.A.
http://www.kelvinlawrence.net
