-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 565
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Meta ticket: Finish bipartite graph implementation #1941
Comments
comment:2
|
comment:3
Also, the automorphism group/canonical label functions need to be called with the correct partitions. |
comment:4
see #8329 |
comment:5
see also #8330 |
comment:6
#8331 is also relevant. |
comment:7
And another #8350. |
comment:8
Also #8425. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
comment:15
Gathering tickets related to |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
comment:19
Proposal from #33261#comment:3
I tried (for complete, random and random regular bipartite graphs) and it's not an easy task:
|
comment:20
Replying to @dcoudert:
Thank you for attempting it.
This is minor IMO (although it might be good for the two to be consistent); just annoying to do.
This suggests that there is a compatibility issue between the two classes, which is a bug IMO since Essentially, IMO subclasses should behave like the base class but with extra features that utilize the special aspects (sometimes known as the "is-a" test). |
comment:21
|
comment:22
Then it should not be a subclass IMO because of a fundamental incompatibility with some common ABC between |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Just added #38618 |
Systematically go through the functions of graph and generic_graph and see which ones, such as add_vertex, need to be overridden in the bipartite graph class so that everything makes sense. Right now, you can add an edge so that the bipartite graph is no longer bipartite.
__cmp__
to distinguish Bipartite from other graphsSee discussion https://groups.google.com/g/sage-devel/c/yU6nu89M4jU
Open tickets
BipartiteGraph
to make it independent from the current coloringFixed issues
add_vertex
,add_vertices
BipartiteGraph
constructor does not create partitions for dict inputsBipartiteGraph
.left and .right to setsBipartiteGraph
add_edge
allows bipartite property to be violatedBipartiteGraph
to the documentationBipartiteGraph
constructor without*args
ignores**kwds
BipartiteGraph
adding edges between new nodes ignores partitionBipartiteGraph
complementBipartiteGraph
DiGraph
asBipartiteGraph
project_right()
projects leftBipartiteGraph
bipartite_graph.py
is_bipartite
toBipartiteGraph
BipartiteGraph
blindly trusts generic graphsbipartite_graph
(and so ingeneralised_quadrangle_with_spread
)canonical_label
returns incorrect partite setsBipartiteGraph()
silently ignores given 'partition' argument.perfect_matchings()
forBipartiteGraph
and ensure that the output is consistent with the partite sets of a given bipartite graphBipartiteGraph()
fails to create graph fromgraph6
stringBipartiteGraph.reduced_adjacency_matrix
: accept keyword arguments for matrix constructorConsidered invalid or duplicate
BipartiteGraph
overrideadd_vertex()
andadd_vertices()
BipartiteGraph
instead of using unreliable methodsCC: @sagetrac-brunellus @maxale @tscrim
Component: graph theory
Issue created by migration from https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/1941
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: