#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: Nathann Cohen
Report Upstream: N/A | Work issues:
Branch: | Commit:
u/dimpase/seidelsw | 799a2bf3bea99309b02eb11cc5438e428135be0c
Dependencies: #18960, #18948, | Stopgaps:
#18988, #18991, #18986, #19018, |
#19019 |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by dimpase):
Replying to [comment:69 ncohen]:
> > No, why should we keep this out now?
>
> Because it is highly specialised and already available by another means,
i.e. by G.twograph().descendant(). Having an optimized alias is not
necessary, and not a sensible thing to add given the amount of functions
already available in that class.
OK, this is a good argument. Perhaps it's better to move it to
strongly_regular_db,
where it is used, than to twographs?
>
> > Sure, please.
>
> If you accept the 'deal' about this unnecessary function, I will. You
will see that the speedup will not be 5%.
IMHO there are more important things than speeding this function up, but
do as you like.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/18972#comment:70>
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.
