#18972: twographs and Seidel switching
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: dimpase | Owner:
Type: enhancement | Status: needs_review
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-6.9
Component: graph theory | Resolution:
Keywords: | Merged in:
Authors: | Reviewers:
Report Upstream: N/A | Work issues:
Branch: | Commit:
u/dimpase/seidelsw | 0a2dae4d4836e37f00bcc2af10dbb1b1d0313c88
Dependencies: #18960, #18948, | Stopgaps:
#18988, #18991 |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by dimpase):
Replying to [comment:46 ncohen]:
> > it's only because this `something` might return more than `True` or
`False`;
> > namely, `Unknown`.
> > (this is your design, not mine...:-)
>
> Sorry, you cannot blame soembody else for that one. Remove `True ==`,
and it still works.
This not a feature I would like to rely on. Using a non-boolean function
as a boolean one
smells of a hack.
>
> > It will add more automatically, as we build more graphs on v+1
vertices which are tagged "2-graph".
>
> Any clue how we can build those entries? There is a *LOT* of them `:-/`
for some of them an explicit construction is referred to, and then it's
just a question of
work. How many of these are so that "2-graph" is the only clue?
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/18972#comment:47>
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/d/optout.
