[gloftus]

Yes, graphs are ubiquitous because they are so abstract. They live on the same level of abstraction as pure numbers. There are useful "numerical" libraries that exist, and by analogy I think you could say there are also useful "graphical" libraries that exist. But we don't really have "number" libraries, and we don't really have "graph" libraries, because those concepts are a bit too abstract to write APIs against.

[kragen]

it's true that numbers are very abstract, which is what makes it so easy to design apis for them

the python runtime includes four built-in number types (small integer, arbitrary-precision integer, float, and complex) and the python standard library includes two more number types (decimal and fractions), and one of the most popular non-standard libraries for python is numpy, which provides some other kinds of numbers such as single-precision floats, vectors, and matrices. other systems like pari/gp have number libraries that provide other kinds of numbers, such as p-adic numbers and galois field elements

the only programming languages i've ever used that didn't have 'number' libraries were esoteric languages like brainfuck and the lambda calculus

[ysofunny]

numbers have all of mathematics as a background which is what makes it so easy to design apis for them

graphs are a much newer development, I think there's a very deep connection between category theory and graphs in general (and also computers make both much more useful somehow)

lambda calculus can be used to define numbers but it's a wonky construction, it's reminiscent of how sets can also be used to define numbers.

[kragen]

that seems reasonable