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