I have tried to move LollipopGraph into families, but there was a problem.
In families, there's the following import:
from six.moves import range
This overrides Python's range. I don't know why. The original
implementation of Lollipop graph uses Python's range, and when it tries to
use the new (six.moves) range it fails (with "This input cannot be turned
into a graph").
I can clearly fix this, by setting something like python_range = range
before the six.moves import, but it is not very elegant. I can also use
networkx's implementation of LollipopGraph (as done with BarbellGraph), but
I am not sure you consider this as the right direction to go.
What do you think?
On Wednesday, 30 November 2016 00:40:21 UTC+2, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tuesday, November 29, 2016 at 4:42:51 PM UTC, Peleg Michaeli wrote:
>>
>> Dear list members,
>>
>> I was wondering what really makes the difference between the graph
>> generators in `basic.py` and those in `families.py`.
>>
>> For one concrete example, I was wondering why `LollipopGraph` appears in
>> `basic.py` and `BarbellGraph` appears in `families.py`. These two graphs
>> are very similar.
>>
>> I ask this for a practical reason: I would like to add a couple of graph
>> families, including the Tadpole graph (which is very similar to the
>> Lollipop graph and the Barbell graph) and the Dipole graph (which is one of
>> the simplest multigraphs).
>>
>> What do you think?
>>
>
> I think all of them could go into families.py
>
>
>>
>>
>> Best,
>> Peleg.
>>
>
--
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 sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
