[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP3-902?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Marko A. Rodriguez closed TINKERPOP3-902.
-----------------------------------------
Resolution: Won't Fix
This was just an idea that as I was writing it sounded bad :).... And then with
[~dmill] and [~spmallette]'s comments, it further reinforces the badness. Okay.
[~dkuppitz] -- how about we DON'T do {{...E()..}} (mid-traversal) for now and
see if people ask for it. If they don't, leave it out.
> Remove g.E() in favor of g.V().outE()
> -------------------------------------
>
> Key: TINKERPOP3-902
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP3-902
> Project: TinkerPop 3
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: process
> Affects Versions: 3.0.2-incubating
> Reporter: Marko A. Rodriguez
> Assignee: Marko A. Rodriguez
> Labels: breaking
> Fix For: 3.1.0-incubating
>
>
> I think we should get rid of {{g.E()}} as this is simply {{g.V().outE()}}.
> The only benefit is being able to access an edge by id... do people do this?
> {code}
> g.E() => g.V().outE()
> g.E(1,2,3) => g.V().outE().has(id,within(1,2,3))
> {code}
> The argument for keeping {{g.E()}} is the second case above.... Anywho, just
> an idea.
> NOTE: Deprecation is easy here.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
