Graph Mining Library

Post by MarkMarine » Wed, Oct 04, 2023, 7:21 PM UTC

riku_iki wrote: post #84

MarkMarine wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m not at google so I’ve got no idea. Reading the code, especially the header files, seems to be pretty standard as far as what I see in non-open source code. So, it’s been my typical dev experience, I’d say if you’re somewhere that has gleaming, easy to understand docs that are actually up to date with the code you all have too much time on your hands, but I serially work at startups that are running to market.

Header file gives you a view into some narrow window of the system, API, pipeline, and you probably have no idea which header files are important and which are part of some internal implementation. 10 mins spent on readme with some high level details is investment with 100x return for lib users.

Post by throwaway290 » Thu, Oct 05, 2023, 6:44 AM UTC

PaulHoule wrote: post #110

throwaway290 wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> foo has a relationship with bar of type baz Nope, "of type baz" is not required.

God the word "type" is overloaded in common discourse. For a link ?s ?p ?o . you could say this is a link of "type" ?p, but technically in RDF we say ?s is of type ?type if ?s ?type . which can be abbreviated as ?s a ?type . If you have RDFS inference turned on, notably, just using ?p in a triple will imply ?p a rdf:Property . In plain RDF you can say a property is of some other ?type but I think you can get in troub…