On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 10:40 AM, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic <ivan.miljenovic@gmail.com> wrote:
On 25 October 2011 16:02, Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 10:16 AM, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic
> <ivan.miljenovic@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 24 October 2011 13:51, Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > How does diagrams compare with graphviz?  If this is an inappropriate
>> > (type-wrong?) question thats ok :-)  Its just that when I last looked at
>> > graphviz I found the documentation somewhat impenetrable -- like much
>> > else
>> > in Hackage -- lots of types, no examples.
>>
>> How is it now, better?  If not, what kind of more documentation would you
>> like?
>
>
> Without claiming to have looked very hard, I looked up grahhviz in hayoo,
> gathered I should be looking at Data.GraphViz and tried clicking everything
> that looked reasonable here
> but still cant find an example of a graph :-) ie a graphviz graph in
> haskell.

Well, there are indeed examples in there, but not in Data.GraphViz:
that module is aimed more at "how can I convert my existing data into
a Dot representation", not constructing one by hand.  As of the latest
version (2999.12.*), there are indeed examples for anyone that wants
them:

* Sample graph in Dot representation used as a base case:
http://hackage.haskell.org/packages/archive/graphviz/2999.12.0.3/doc/html/Data-GraphViz-Types.html
* Using the canonical representation:
http://hackage.haskell.org/packages/archive/graphviz/2999.12.0.3/doc/html/Data-GraphViz-Types-Canonical.html
* Using the graph representation:
http://hackage.haskell.org/packages/archive/graphviz/2999.12.0.3/doc/html/Data-GraphViz-Types-Generalised.html
* Using the Monadic representation (based upon the dotgen package):
http://hackage.haskell.org/packages/archive/graphviz/2999.12.0.3/doc/html/Data-GraphViz-Types-Graph.html



Thanks.

In the Data.GraphViz.Types.Generalised page you have the starting line:

It is sometimes useful to be able to manipulate a Dot graph as an actual graph. This representation lets you do so...

Evidently some other context is needed to understand this line?
[Sorry if I am dense]