Show HN: Ascii_tree – A way to create beautiful ASCII trees

Post by contingencies » Sun, Sep 22, 2019, 8:58 PM UTC

kps wrote: post #4

I think that with all the unicodes lying around these days we can do a little nicer: ┌───┐ ┌─────┤ 1 ├─────┐ │ └───┘ │ ┌─┴─┐ ┌─┴─┐ ┌─┤ 2 ├─┐ ┌─┤ 3 ├─┐ │ └───┘ │ │ └───┘ │ ┌─┴─┐ ┌─┴─┐ ┌─┴─┐ ┌─┴─┐ │ 4 │ │ 5 │ │ 6 │ │ 7 │ └───┘ └───┘ └───┘ └───┘ (Better if the presentation doesn't lead beyond the font.)

  I think that I shall never see
  A graph more lovely than a tree.
  A tree whose crucial property
  Is loop-free connectivity.
  A tree that must be sure to span
  So packets can reach every LAN.
  First, the root must be selected.
  By ID, it is elected.
  Least-cost paths from root are traced.
  In the tree, these paths are placed.
  A mesh is made by folks like me,
  Then bridges find a spanning tree.

  I hope that we shall one day see
  A graph more lovely than a tree.
  A graph to boost efficiency
  While still configuration-free.
  A network where RBridges can
  Route packets to their target LAN.
  The paths they find, to our elation,
  Are least cost paths to destination!
  With packet hop counts we now see,
  The network need not be loop-free!
  RBridges work transparently,
  Without a common spanning tree.

Post by shpongled » Sun, Sep 22, 2019, 10:12 PM UTC

cbarrick wrote: post #12

Honestly, I was hoping for something like the `tree` command. I've implemented that algorithm before, but it was painful and not portable. These trees are definitely cooler and more complex but maybe fewer use cases. Once you start dealing with more than a few layers, the output is going to line-wrap in a terminal. For larger trees, DOT [1] is probably more suitable. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DOT_(graph_desc…

Post by tempguy9999 » Sun, Sep 22, 2019, 10:44 PM UTC

dole wrote: post #7

baalimago wrote: post #2

The lack of centering is itching my ocd.

Real world or lorem ipsum examples would give a better idea of how beautiful the trees are than just single digits.

Post by throwaway180118 » Sun, Sep 22, 2019, 11:44 PM UTC

kps wrote: post #4

I think that with all the unicodes lying around these days we can do a little nicer: ┌───┐ ┌─────┤ 1 ├─────┐ │ └───┘ │ ┌─┴─┐ ┌─┴─┐ ┌─┤ 2 ├─┐ ┌─┤ 3 ├─┐ │ └───┘ │ │ └───┘ │ ┌─┴─┐ ┌─┴─┐ ┌─┴─┐ ┌─┴─┐ │ 4 │ │ 5 │ │ 6 │ │ 7 │ └───┘ └───┘ └───┘ └───┘ (Better if the presentation doesn't lead beyond the font.)

Post by chrismorgan » Mon, Sep 23, 2019, 5:39 AM UTC

kps wrote: post #4

I think that with all the unicodes lying around these days we can do a little nicer: ┌───┐ ┌─────┤ 1 ├─────┐ │ └───┘ │ ┌─┴─┐ ┌─┴─┐ ┌─┤ 2 ├─┐ ┌─┤ 3 ├─┐ │ └───┘ │ │ └───┘ │ ┌─┴─┐ ┌─┴─┐ ┌─┴─┐ ┌─┴─┐ │ 4 │ │ 5 │ │ 6 │ │ 7 │ └───┘ └───┘ └───┘ └───┘ (Better if the presentation doesn't lead beyond the font.)

              ┏━━━┓
        ╭─────┨ 1 ┠─────╮
        │     ┗━━━┛     │
      ┏━┷━┓           ┏━┷━┓
    ╭─┨ 2 ┠─╮       ╭─┨ 3 ┠─╮
    │ ┗━━━┛ │       │ ┗━━━┛ │
  ┏━┷━┓   ┏━┷━┓   ┏━┷━┓   ┏━┷━┓
  ┃ 4 ┃   ┃ 5 ┃   ┃ 6 ┃   ┃ 7 ┃
  ┗━━━┛   ┗━━━┛   ┗━━━┛   ┗━━━┛

              ╔═══╗
        ╭─────╢ 1 ╟─────╮
        │     ╚═══╝     │
      ╔═╧═╗           ╔═╧═╗
    ╭─╢ 2 ╟─╮       ╭─╢ 3 ╟─╮
    │ ╚═══╝ │       │ ╚═══╝ │
  ╔═╧═╗   ╔═╧═╗   ╔═╧═╗   ╔═╧═╗
  ║ 4 ║   ║ 5 ║   ║ 6 ║   ║ 7 ║
  ╚═══╝   ╚═══╝   ╚═══╝   ╚═══╝