#13990: Bug fix and small improvement of spanning_trees_count
--------------------------------+-------------------------------------------
Reporter: azi | Owner: jason, ncohen, rlm
Type: defect | Status: needs_review
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-5.7
Component: graph theory | Resolution:
Keywords: | Work issues:
Report Upstream: N/A | Reviewers:
Authors: | Merged in:
Dependencies: | Stopgaps:
--------------------------------+-------------------------------------------
Comment (by ncohen):
A tree is a set of edges such that the graph induced by the set of edges
is connected. Hence there is one spanning tree of the empty graph.
I'm not playing with words, just saying that one can either expect 1 or 0
there...
For instance, people there expect 1 : http://oeis.org/A000272
And I guess that you will always need one when you define a recursion
formula to compute it.
Agreed for you modification to "abs". Looks like everybody out there
agrees that this is not needed `:-)`
Nathann
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/13990#comment:4>
Sage <http://www.sagemath.org>
Sage: Creating a Viable Open Source Alternative to Magma, Maple, Mathematica,
and MATLAB
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-trac" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
