Change by David Mc Dougall :
--
stage: patch review -> resolved
status: open -> closed
___
Python tracker
<https://bugs.python.org/issue46071>
___
___
Pyth
Change by David Mc Dougall :
--
nosy: -dam1784
___
Python tracker
<https://bugs.python.org/issue46466>
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
New submission from David Mc Dougall :
My inline comment ('#') got picked up by the help command.
Write the following code to a file (I named it "reproducer.py"):
"""
class Foo:
# Hello docstring, I'm a '#' comment!
def bar(self):
pass
assert Foo
Change by David Mc Dougall :
--
resolution: -> wont fix
stage: patch review -> resolved
status: open -> closed
___
Python tracker
<https://bugs.python.or
Change by David Mc Dougall :
--
nosy: -dam1784
___
Python tracker
<https://bugs.python.org/issue46071>
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
David Mc Dougall added the comment:
> It seems David places more value on the idea of the concrete mapping
> "pointing forwards" with respect to the abstract directed graph, while it
> seems Tim places more value on the idea of the abstract mapping direction
> corr
David Mc Dougall added the comment:
No, the code works fine. I just wish the docs weren't so muddled.
I wish the docs started by saying:
> The graph is a dict of {'start_node': ['end_nodes',]}
> The topological sorter puts the end_nodes before their start_nodes.
[note: this i
David Mc Dougall added the comment:
I can post literally hundreds of examples of directed graphs that are
traversable in the forward direction. This might be the only one which is
*only* traversable backwards.
> As to the meaning of "point to"
Here is one: If I have a pointer
David Mc Dougall added the comment:
> you're not actually confused.
I was when I first read it!
> the meanings of "predecessor" and "successor" are universally agreed upon
I disagree. The universally agreed upon terms are "directed edge u -> v"
David Mc Dougall added the comment:
> The argument passed is the predecessor form of the graph B -> A
where graph = {'A' : ['B']}
This is part that I'm objecting to. The form of the graph should be A -> B, not
B -> A.
The issue with the current form is that you can not traver
David Mc Dougall added the comment:
> If the way the user collects their data stores only successor links (which,
> as above, seems odd in applications that actually use topsorts), then they
> need something like this instead:
Actually they only need to do this:
ts = Topologi
David Mc Dougall added the comment:
The "reverse-toposort" is actually quite a good idea. The end-user is usually
going to want to iterate over the sorted output in the "reverse" order anyways,
especially if they're doing task ordering / dependency resolution.
Also, the
Change by David Mc Dougall :
--
keywords: +patch
pull_requests: +28515
stage: -> patch review
pull_request: https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/30269
___
Python tracker
<https://bugs.python.org/issu
New submission from David Mc Dougall :
The graphlib documentation has some grammar & phrasing issues.
--
components: Library (Lib)
messages: 409370
nosy: dam1784
priority: normal
severity: normal
status: open
title: Graphlib documentation (general cleanup)
type: enhancement
vers
Change by David Mc Dougall :
--
title: Graphlib documentation -> Graphlib documentation (edge direction)
___
Python tracker
<https://bugs.python.org/issu
Change by David Mc Dougall :
--
pull_requests: +28446
pull_request: https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/30223
___
Python tracker
<https://bugs.python.org/issue46
New submission from David Mc Dougall :
The documentation for graphlib encourages users to represent their graphs in a
awkward format.
Graphs are currently represented using dictionaries of nodes, for example:
graph["end_node"] = ["start_node"]
And this is unintuitive b
17 matches
Mail list logo
