News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:New way to have complex discussions by basil-rash on Monday May 06, 2024 @06:54PM (#40280426)
That’s where the UI affordances come in, for instance a button on each node to hide/show all comments that are descendants of that node.
Re:New way to have complex discussions by stavros on Tuesday May 07, 2024 @05:24AM (#40283726)
So a tree, but worse.
Re:New way to have complex discussions by basil-rash on Tuesday May 07, 2024 @07:57AM (#40284470)
What makes you say it’s worse?
Re:New way to have complex discussions by stavros on Tuesday May 07, 2024 @08:13AM (#40284558)
The underlying conceptual structure is still a tree, but now you have to unfold it into a line, with one reply potentially having nothing to do with the one before it (because they're on very different branches).
Re:New way to have complex discussions by basil-rash on Tuesday May 07, 2024 @01:05PM (#40288417)
No, the underlying structure is a DAG. I've already stated this, and that heavy UI affordances should be made to support ease of interaction with this model.
Re:New way to have complex discussions by barbarr on Tuesday May 07, 2024 @06:07AM (#40283943)
4chan threads are more like DAGs
Re:New way to have complex discussions by krapp on Tuesday May 07, 2024 @06:19AM (#40283990)
The graph of 4chan threads are definitely cyclical, since they can include back-references.
Re:New way to have complex discussions by basil-rash on Tuesday May 07, 2024 @08:07AM (#40284529)
To be cyclical they’d need to have elements in reply to a post made after they were created. Including back references is a way of adding more parents, not children.
Re:New way to have complex discussions by philosopher1234 on Tuesday May 07, 2024 @11:10AM (#40286584)
You can reference posts that haven’t happened yet
Re:New way to have complex discussions by basil-rash on Tuesday May 07, 2024 @01:06PM (#40288446)
You are referring to providing a sequential post ID past the current latest? That is more of a quirk of their naming convention than a product feature. UUID's, for instance, would not support this, and checks could be made in either case to prevent it.