Allow including BFS start node with *bfs 0..

[WCWedin]

As far as I can tell, there's no way for a BFS search to include the start node in the captured set. For instance, -[*bfs 0]- will never capture any nodes, since BFS always excludes the start node. While this example is obviously artificial, real use would be more like -[:NEXT*bfs 0..]-, which currently behaves identically to *bfs 1...

Would it be feasible to support using *bfs 0 to include the start node in the searched set? The behavior of certain queries would be affected (those counting on *bfs 0.. to act instead like *bfs 1..), but maybe *bfs 0 not being particularly meaningful makes it less likely to appear in the wild.

[antejavor]

Hmm, this is interesting, but if *bfs 1.. is empty, that means the same given path does not exist, but you would like to check if the node exists by including it in the searched set?

[WCWedin]

I think the answer to your question is "yes." At the heart of this request is the ability to use *bfs 0.. in place of *0.. when BFS is the desired algorithm and the start node is a relevant part of the chain.