We do not want two different functions that do the same thing. If your code is unequivocally better than the existing code, then it should replace the existing program. On the other hand, if both approaches have merit, then you can add an "algorithm" keyword to the existing function, which will allow the user to choose which code to use. (You can write a new private function whose name starts with an underscore. Then the main function can use the value of the algorithm parameter to decide whether to call the new function.)
Please open a github issue, so further discussion can happen there, instead of in this general thread. On Sunday, November 30, 2025 at 8:30:42 AM UTC-7 [email protected] wrote: > Hello from a newbie, and thank you for Sage and all the work you're > putting into it! > > I'd like to know you opinion on this. If this seems useful for the > community, I believe I can improve > sage.graphs.graph_coloring.number_of_n_colorings > by adding pruning during the recursion. I'm considering the following > steps: > > - Start testing with Git. > - Rename the variables in my code from Czech to English. > - Add comments to the code. > - Integrate it into Sage's code structure. > - Prepare examples with results for testing and comparison. > - Write documentation, etc. > > After that, I'd propose adding a new function, e.g. > number_of_n_colorings_with_pruning, so that the original pure-recursive > number_of_n_colorings > remains unchanged. > > Do you recommend a different approach? > > Best regards, > Pavel > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/a7fd7a61-92aa-4d04-a60d-df4e55742d82n%40googlegroups.com.
