Live data from Hacker News

Who needs Graphviz when you can build it yourself?

spidermonkey.dev

41–50 of 114 posts

Re: Who needs Graphviz when you can build it yourself?

#41
post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, that would be great. Iongraph is MPL, graphviz is EPL. But Iongraph is Javascript anyway, so you would need to use Claude to translate it to C

Why would you need Claude for that?

Kimi is also good. New habits, you know

Re: Who needs Graphviz when you can build it yourself?

#43
post #18

We looked at using Graphviz, but the copyleft nature of Graphviz license (Eclipse Public License) means that this will never be allowed in our company's software.

Interesting. The wiki says: "The Eclipse Public License is designed to be a business-friendly free software license, and features weaker copyleft provisions than licenses such as the GNU General Public License (GPL)."

Re: Who needs Graphviz when you can build it yourself?

#44
post #25
post #19

To be more accurate, the comparison is not with Graphviz, but with dot(1). Graphviz is a visualization framework and it includes many layout engines, implementing different algorithms: dot, neato, fdp, sfdp, circo, twopi, ... It would be great if this new custom algorithm were to be contributed to Graphviz.

It's a bit confusing. Dot apparently is both the language name [1] for the Graphviz syntax, and one of the layout engines [2], possibly with different capitalizations. [1] https://graphviz.org/doc/info/lang.html [2] https://graphviz.org/docs/layouts/dot/

I've used GraphViz/Dot (I call `dot` in my terminal, but the package to install is `graphviz`) for probably two decades at this point, and what is what is still not clear to me, kind of like the whole imagemagick/convert thing which is similar, at least to someone on the outside.

Not sure why they can't come up with new names, use those, then when you invoke the program in the terminal, call the binary the same thing, instead of mucking about with calling everything differently, except some things, that share names.

Re: Who needs Graphviz when you can build it yourself?

#45
post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry, I don't get your comment. What makes you think the approach or the code described in the article were developed by an LLM?

I don't know how the code was created. But based on my experience with multiple project, both current frameworks and AI changed the game. I used to much more reply on existing software and cursing that they don't do what I want - as the time to create a personalized tool was simply much to afford. Now often it is quicker to create a personalized tool than fight with existing one.

Probably, but I see no connection with the article we're discussing.

Re: Who needs Graphviz when you can build it yourself?

#46
post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, that would be great. Iongraph is MPL, graphviz is EPL. But Iongraph is Javascript anyway, so you would need to use Claude to translate it to C

Why would you need Claude for that?

Everyone knows it is impossible to translate 1000 lines of JS to C in a reasonable amount of time. I mean, 1000 lines is kind of a lot, you know?

Re: Who needs Graphviz when you can build it yourself?

#47
post #24

This is a great write up and thank you to the author! Just a note that graphviz dot is not purely Sugiyama’s, there is a paper on the site that details the actual implementation. Also judging from the final two images (dot vs iongraph for the same large graph) it’s clear that dot is optimized for minimal area where iongraph does not. That’s the trade off. The author claims one is more easy to navigate than the other,…

"Ultimately I found that visualizing large graphs is rarely helpful in practice; they can certainly look nice for some well defined graphs, but I rarely saw well defined graphs in the wild."

Yes, I'm with you: https://jerf.org/iri/post/2025/on_layers_and_boxes_and_lines...

Since writing that I'm finding my frustration at the inability of diagrams to link out or be linked into is growing. In hindsight it seems a super obvious way of using diagrams in a useful manner and nothing supports it worth a crap, even things that really ought to like Mermaid (which permits out links in text but holds it at arm's length (requiring you to set the diagram to "unsafe"[1]) and as near I can tell in a quick search never mentions this as a thing you can do in its docs, and still has no particular support I can find for linking in to a graph). This has turned into a "can't unsee" for me.

(Obviously I have not used every diagramming solution ever, so maybe there is something out there that supports linking in and/or out, and I'd love to hear about it... however, bear in mind I'm looking for what you might call "first class" support, that is, a feature clearly considered important in the design phase of the project, not the sort of accidental-combination-of-features accidental support that Mermaid half has, if you flip some obscure settings to "lower security" somewhere.)

[1]: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/41960529/how-to-add-a-li...

Re: Who needs Graphviz when you can build it yourself?

#48
post #18

We looked at using Graphviz, but the copyleft nature of Graphviz license (Eclipse Public License) means that this will never be allowed in our company's software.

Interesting. The wiki says: "The Eclipse Public License is designed to be a business-friendly free software license, and features weaker copyleft provisions than licenses such as the GNU General Public License (GPL)."

Well, it's just they think it's business-friendly.

From EPL:

> If a Contributor Distributes the Program in any form, then: a) the Program must also be made available as Source Code, in accordance with section 3.2 ...

Except in startups that really embrace the idea of open source, no "serious" company will offer any portion of their source code under EPL license, even if that's just the modified/derived part of it. Not a chance.

For most companies, in reality, there are only two types of licenses -- copyleft and permissive, no middle ground. You either don't touch it with a 10 foot pole or do whatever you want as long as you copy and paste the attributions.

Re: Who needs Graphviz when you can build it yourself?

#49
post #24

This is a great write up and thank you to the author! Just a note that graphviz dot is not purely Sugiyama’s, there is a paper on the site that details the actual implementation. Also judging from the final two images (dot vs iongraph for the same large graph) it’s clear that dot is optimized for minimal area where iongraph does not. That’s the trade off. The author claims one is more easy to navigate than the other,…

Yep, agreed. CMake does deps graphviz (been there), that is better than nothing. But big diagrams need support for exploding subdiagrams and going back.

Re: Who needs Graphviz when you can build it yourself?

#50
post #47
post #24

This is a great write up and thank you to the author! Just a note that graphviz dot is not purely Sugiyama’s, there is a paper on the site that details the actual implementation. Also judging from the final two images (dot vs iongraph for the same large graph) it’s clear that dot is optimized for minimal area where iongraph does not. That’s the trade off. The author claims one is more easy to navigate than the other,…

"Ultimately I found that visualizing large graphs is rarely helpful in practice; they can certainly look nice for some well defined graphs, but I rarely saw well defined graphs in the wild." Yes, I'm with you: https://jerf.org/iri/post/2025/on_layers_and_boxes_and_lines... Since writing that I'm finding my frustration at the inability of diagrams to link out or be linked into is growing. In hindsight it seems a super…

Enterprise architect ($$) had that buried in the gui, and wondered for long if obsidian canvas could do the same, reports wanted.
Post reply on HN