#18982: New non-existence tests for strongly regular graphs
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
Reporter: | Owner:
ncohen | Status: positive_review
Type: | Milestone: sage-6.9
enhancement | Resolution:
Priority: major | Merged in:
Component: graph | Reviewers: Jori Mäntysalo
theory | Work issues:
Keywords: | Commit:
Authors: | 9d85b9778bbab21e37c429c6923acc6d37af69bf
Nathann Cohen | Stopgaps:
Report Upstream: N/A |
Branch: |
u/ncohen/18982 |
Dependencies: |
#18960 |
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
Changes (by jmantysalo):
* status: needs_review => positive_review
* reviewer: => Jori Mäntysalo
Comment:
Well, was not that hard.
Assuming other parts work, this seems to be direct (and correct)
translation of equations from the paper to the code. I read it, and tested
with examples given in the paper. I think that `l` as a variable name
makes sense here, because `lambda` is already reserved name (and we do not
use Fortress language `:=)`), even if it violates PEP 0008 part "Names to
Avoid". Hence I mark this as positive review.
Btw, `graphs.strongly_regular_graph(324,57,0,12)` says "- - graph
exists.Comments: - -", i.e. has a missing space. You may want to correct
it, when next time modifying this file.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/18982#comment:9>
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.
