Felipe Lessa <felipe.le...@gmail.com> writes: > On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 7:53 PM, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic > <ivan.miljeno...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Felipe Lessa <felipe.le...@gmail.com> writes: >>> I'm sorry for being silly, but what's the motivation of having this >>> canonic form? =) >> >> A few things come to mind: >> >> * Easier to reason about, [...] >> * Less ambiguity: [...] > > So you want to do some post-processing to the Dot graph inside > Haskell-land? Or is it just a pretty printer? I mean, Dot will > accept both and produce the same result (by definition), so if you > just wanted to draw it then there wouldn't be any difference.
It's not just to draw it, it's for when you import some Dot code and then want to edit it (add some extra attributes, etc.). And to an extent, it's also a pretty-printer (though graphviz's pretty-printer will still probably stick to using "dot -Tcanon" as it's using the pretty library, which doesn't support infinite-length lines with indenting). -- Ivan Lazar Miljenovic ivan.miljeno...@gmail.com IvanMiljenovic.wordpress.com _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
