#15060: The empty graph once again
-------------------------------------------------+-------------------------
Reporter: darij | Owner:
Type: defect | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-5.12
Component: combinatorics | Resolution:
Keywords: graphs, border cases, bitset, | Merged in:
memleak | Reviewers:
Authors: | Work issues:
Report Upstream: N/A | Commit:
Branch: | Stopgaps:
Dependencies: |
-------------------------------------------------+-------------------------
Comment (by ncohen):
> Then the factorization of a graph into disjoint connected components is
not unique. You can add as many empty components as you wish then.
ahahaha. Well, at least I have no reason to ask for a decomposition of a
connected graph into connected subgraphs. What would you answer for the
empty graph ? `:-P`
> > I would love it to be {{{"ValueError: We don't know whether an empty
graph is connected. We discussed it, and just never agreed on anything"}}}
>
> Sounds good :)
Really ? Great then ! I love when arbitrary decisions are claimed as such
! "We had no idea. So let's not write anything we might regret" `:-D`
Nathann
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/15060#comment:6>
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.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
