[Neo] Minor inconsistency in shell behavior

Mattias Persson mattias at neotechnology.com
Fri Jan 22 13:45:36 CET 2010


Yes you're probably right about that... I'll add a task about it

2010/1/21 David Montag <david at montag.se>:
> Hi,
>
> I've found something that I consider a minor inconsistency in the shell.
> Consider the following interaction:
>
> neo-sh (0)$ ls
> *key =[new]
> (me) --<rel>--> (3)
> (me) --<rel2>--> (4)
> neo-sh (0)$ cd 3
> neo-sh (3)$ ls 4
> (me) <--<rel2>-- (0)
>
> The last (me) should, in my opinion, be (4). It feels natural that (me)
> refers to the current node, and not the one being listed.
>
> As I said, a veeery minor thing, but a thing none the less. Agree? Keep up
> the good work :)
>
> -David
> _______________________________________________
> Neo mailing list
> User at lists.neo4j.org
> https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user
>



-- 
Mattias Persson, [mattias at neotechnology.com]
Neo Technology, www.neotechnology.com


More information about the User mailing list