#6828: [with patch, needs work] Random Bipartite Graph
--------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
Reporter: ncohen | Owner: rlm
Type: enhancement | Status: new
Priority: minor | Milestone: sage-4.1.2
Component: graph theory | Keywords:
Reviewer: | Author:
Merged: |
--------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
Comment(by rbeezer):
Hi Nathann,
Several of my comments at #6823 apply here - just a diff file rather than
a Mercurial file, use "trac_xxxx" for the filename, and the inputs should
be checked for errors. In this case the probability should be checked and
n1 and n2 should be checked that they are positive - making one negative
does decrease the total.
It would seem that the final call to the {{{BipartiteGraph}}} generator
can cause problems. Try 15 to 20 vertices in each part with a very low
edge-probability like 0.01, then despite having a good pos_dict, the
isolated vertices of one part move into a different "half" of the plot.
Can you make the name look better than {{{Random bipartite graph: graph on
30 vertices}}}? Maybe this is a consequence of final call as well. Maybe
the probability could be included in the name?
I think the construction {{{range(n1+n2)[n1:]}}} can be accomplished more
clearly with {{{range(n1,n1+n2)}}}.
Rob
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/6828#comment:1>
Sage <http://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 post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
