#5911: [with patch, needs work] greatly improve the documentation one gets from
Graph?
----------------------------+-----------------------------------------------
Reporter: was | Owner: rlm
Type: enhancement | Status: needs_work
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-4.1.3
Component: graph theory | Keywords:
Work_issues: | Author:
Reviewer: | Merged:
----------------------------+-----------------------------------------------
Comment(by rlm):
Replying to [comment:10 ncohen]:
> What about a good old : "cf. Graph" (or a plain copy of Graph?), as it
is exactly the same ? ^^;
>
> We could just write a list of the functions of DiGraph that are
unaavailable in Graph, couldn't we ?
Imagine you have never used Sage before, and you really really like
DiGraphs. So one of the first things you do in Sage, aside from `2+2` or
`factor(factorial(12))`, is type `DiGraph?`. I think there are such
(potential) users out there, and the documentation there should be
independently helpful. Certainly a reference to `Graph?` would be
appropriate, but the docs you get from `DiGraph?` should also be self-
contained and helpful.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/5911#comment:12>
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 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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
