Hello! Thanks for the welcome! Ivan: Too overcome the problem of large and messy images, i propose too have a system to navigate into the code. You could zoom in and out, occulting unecessary details while zooming out. My big graphic of map (+1) could easely be summed up to: (Embedded image moved to file: pic36782.jpg) My idea is to provide an efficient system of zooming, as you can zoom in a fractal picture, showing more or less details! Such a tool, if created, could be implemented as a part of, or used by SourceGraph. In the first place i thought the GHC API would be great to infer each function's type. But indeed haskell-src-exts seems to be more appropriate as you get the structure of the program. Lyndon: Wahou this page (MockingBirds) his very interresting and funny! Mihai: That's funny we had the same idea quite the same time. I guess that idea is "in the air" and as said one contributor on your Reddit, "a well explored territory": It has major pitfalls and the reason why we heard little about that wild territory is because many explorers never returned :) By the way, i'm interrested and i could contribute on the little spare time i have. My idea is to make it as a library that display code as graphs. That library could be used for several purposes: debugging as you proposes, but also education, shows, audit (with SourceGraph), and why not construction... I think this kind of visual tool could be a "plus" in Haskell popularity. Despite not being that efficient, it is spectacular. Ronald: I agree big graphs are confusing. The big point of the project is to find or adapt an algorithm to simplify the graph and make it valuable. I'll have to make little graphics for each of your versions of map, this may be instructive to me... Stephen: I'll have a look at those interaction nets! But the home page for INBlobs seems to be down. Thank you all for you kind responses. Corentin
