Alternative for "descend" in the context of computer file systems

Question

I was wondering if there's an alternative for the word descend (maybe something better than simply go), in the context of computer file systems, that doesn't imply going down.

When we talk about file systems, which usually have a hierarchical tree structure, it's common to say "descend into subdirectories/subfolders" when going from a parent into child directories. However, we also use the term root to refer to the node with no parent, so in the analogy of a tree branching out, I don't really like using the word "descend" for going from parent to child nodes (on the other hand, it actually works very well for the parent-child analogy).

In general, the tree data structure (not an actual tree) doesn't have a "physical" direction, and in practice, people visualise them in different ways (top-down, bottom-up or even left-to-right), so I would rather use a word that doesn't imply any physical sense of direction.

Example: "The diff command will not descend into subdirectories by default, so the --recursive option is needed."

UPDATE: There were several good suggestions, but I'm accepting the answer from @jeff-zeitlin because I think it sufficiently rationalises the use of "descend" with the ancestor analogy, which removes my original objection. Beyond that, I think the commonly-used term should be the obvious choice.

Answer 1

Descend is perfectly fine, and doesn’t imply an up-down direction - rather, as a child is a descendant of his parents, so too is a child node viewed as a descendant of the parent node, with the root node being the parent of the entire file system. Just as you descend your family tree from your apical ancestors, you descend the file system tree from the apical root node. This is signalling a hierarchical relationship, not a directional one.

Answer 2

Traverse is a good, general word, so probably not quite what you are after. This article on tree traversal avoids the use of descend completely - not sure if that is deliberate or not.

How about "enter" or even just "go in to"?

Answer 3

Can't help but shout it: DRILL DOWN

And look, there is even a drill down tree!

Drill-down is an action that will provide more details about data. Drilling down through a dimension hierarchy will expand next level of the dimension. It can be compared to browsing through your directory structure.

drill down tree

Drill down, as opposed to top level

Answer 4

Progress or proceed both work in this sense, with proceed being a little more action-oriented:

Progress through the file tree.

Or:

Proceed into the subdirectory and execute the file named...

Those are both somewhat formal, though I do like proceed.

If I were using everyday language to tell someone what to do in, for instance, a remote session (which I do for my job occasionally), I'd simply say:

"Go into the subdirectory and..."

Then perhaps later I would say:

"Okay, now go back out to the main folder and...".

But you've indicated you want something better than go, so proceed would be a good option.

Answer 5

Perhaps consider using 'branch'. Like roots, they don't necessarily always go "down". EBT

Considering it further is the term 'tracing', or perhaps 'track[ing]' something not already utilized in your discipline's terminology? EBT

Answer 6

In conversations, the word "cd" is used most often, as in the "cd" command. I would not abuse it in a text, but there would be nothing wrong with using it as a secondary option. For the main words to describe your intended use, "descend", "change into", "enter" are quite appropriate.

Answer 7

Another choice would be to use the word navigate. It implies the sense of motion that descend does but at the same time removes the sense of direction. A file system tree structure does provide defined linkage paths and navigate is a great term to describe following those paths.

Answer 8

iterate (through the list of items found in the filesystem tree, perhaps only until you find what you want)