Opened 9 years ago
Closed 8 years ago
#10441 closed defect (fixed)
Error creating an empty multi-edge (di)graph
Reported by: | mhs | Owned by: | somebody |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | major | Milestone: | sage-5.0 |
Component: | graph theory | Keywords: | creating empty Graph, DiGraph, multiple_edges=True |
Cc: | mvngu, brunellus | Merged in: | sage-5.0.beta3 |
Authors: | Lukáš Lánský | Reviewers: | Nathann Cohen |
Report Upstream: | N/A | Work issues: | |
Branch: | Commit: | ||
Dependencies: | Stopgaps: |
Description (last modified by )
In SAGE 4.5.1 if you try to create an empty graph or digraph using the multi-edge keyword the (di)graph created is a non-multi (di)graph.
Examples of the strange behaviour:
sage: G=Graph(multiple_edges=True) sage: G Graph on 0 vertices
sage: G=Graph([],multiple_edges=True) sage: G Graph on 0 vertices
sage: H=DiGraph(multiple_edges=True) sage: H Digraph on 0 vertices
sage: H=DiGraph([],multiple_edges=True) sage: H Digraph on 0 vertices
Nevertheless it works fine, i.e. produces a multi-graph/multi-digraph if one uses an empty dictionary like in the following:
sage: G=Graph({},multiple_edges=True) sage: G Multi-graph on 0 vertices
sage: H=DiGraph({},multiple_edges=True) sage: H Multi-digraph on 0 vertices
After posting on sage-develop Strange behaviour of add_edges http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel/browse_thread/thread/69773eae8ba3cefc I was asked to open a new ticket...
Attachments (1)
Change History (11)
comment:1 Changed 9 years ago by
- Description modified (diff)
comment:2 Changed 9 years ago by
- Cc mvngu added
- Report Upstream changed from Not yet reported upstream; Will do shortly. to N/A
- Reviewers somebody deleted
comment:3 Changed 8 years ago by
- Cc brunellus added
comment:4 Changed 8 years ago by
comment:5 Changed 8 years ago by
- Status changed from new to needs_review
I started #12318 for the mentioned problem.
Fix for this ticket is a rather simple one, I think. Prove me wrong! :-)
comment:6 Changed 8 years ago by
Hellooooooooooooo !!
Well, the code building the graph is a bit messy but indeed what you wrote 1) prevents the bug 2) is what we should do until somebody comes with another weird situation :-)
Would it be possible to move your "# not a multi [...]" comments to the line just above the test, though ? That's where we put flags like "optional" or "not tested" for the automatic tests, and it's best to be sure these comments do not interfere ^^;
Nathann
comment:7 Changed 8 years ago by
- Status changed from needs_review to needs_work
Changed 8 years ago by
comment:8 Changed 8 years ago by
- Status changed from needs_work to needs_review
Thanks! Is it better now?
comment:9 Changed 8 years ago by
- Reviewers set to Nathann Cohen
- Status changed from needs_review to positive_review
Hellooooooo !!!
I thought you would put the comments just before the "::" but there's no problem with way either... Good to go ! :-)
Nathann
comment:10 Changed 8 years ago by
- Merged in set to sage-5.0.beta3
- Resolution set to fixed
- Status changed from positive_review to closed
I think that having kwds in the Graph constructor is very confusing, because any misspelling of an argument pass through without notice. Do you see some serious reason why is this there? I'm looking into the code and can't see anything.