Opened 4 years ago
Closed 4 years ago
#19381 closed defect (fixed)
Refactor Graph.__init__
Reported by:  ncohen  Owned by:  

Priority:  major  Milestone:  sage6.9 
Component:  graph theory  Keywords:  
Cc:  borassi, dcoudert, dimpase, vdelecroix  Merged in:  
Authors:  Nathann Cohen  Reviewers:  David Coudert 
Report Upstream:  N/A  Work issues:  
Branch:  9bdf527 (Commits)  Commit:  9bdf527fd59509647ccefd86cbd87bb2e92071b4 
Dependencies:  Stopgaps: 
Description
This (very unpleasant) ticket attempts to clean a bit more the content of Graph.__init__
.
To this end, it creates a graph_input
modules that gathers into individual functions the different pieces of code that build a graph from <any other data>.
Admittedly, this is just one step toward a cleaner graph constructor, but we are not there yet.
Nothing smart is done in this branch: the pieces of code from Graph.__init__
are moved to new individual functions (some variables/parameters are renamed). One from DiGraph.__init__
is moved too.
In particular, some pieces of code from DiGraph.__init__
may eventually be merged with the functions that this branch creates, but this will be done later.
This branch is already sufficiently long and sufficiently unpleasant to write/review :/
Nathann
Change History (12)
comment:1 Changed 4 years ago by
 Branch set to u/ncohen/19381
 Commit set to a74b0ff454c22237989edef3078ae55552ccf02e
 Status changed from new to needs_review
comment:2 followup: ↓ 3 Changed 4 years ago by
Would it be possible in this ticket to add support for constructing a graph by [V, E]
like this:
sage: V = [1,2,3,4] sage: E = [[1,2]] sage: Graph([V, E])
I know I can do it like this
sage: G = Graph({1:[2], 2:[], 3:[], 4:[]}) sage: G.vertices() [1, 2, 3, 4]
but this is somewhat cumbersome (and doesn't work for graphs with labeled (multiple) edges). The other way I know how to do this is I have to pass the edge set, then add the vertices.
The reason I ask is because I have wanted to create immutable graphs with larger vertex sets than the connectivity of the edges and I don't want to have to waste time copying a mutable graph backend into the static backend. (As an additional reason, it also follows the basic intro to combinatorics definition of a graph.)
I should also be able to review this ticket too (and I definitely will if you make the above change).
comment:3 in reply to: ↑ 2 Changed 4 years ago by
Would it be possible in this ticket to add support for constructing a graph by
[V, E]
like this:
Certainly not in this ticket. It refactors code, and it is already (as you can see) a lot to review. I guess it can be done in another ticket, though, I don't thing that there is any problem. With 56 lines any ambiguity with the other kind of inputs can be cleared ([V,f], list_of_edges, ...)
I know I can do it like this
sage: G = Graph({1:[2], 2:[], 3:[], 4:[]}) sage: G.vertices() [1, 2, 3, 4]but this is somewhat cumbersome (and doesn't work for graphs with labeled (multiple) edges).
sage: Graph({1:{2:['l1','l2']}},multiedges=True).edges() [(1, 2, 'l1'), (1, 2, 'l2')]
See also Graph.to_dictionary
which generates this kind of output.
Nathann
comment:4 Changed 4 years ago by
Note: This is a internal...
> 'an internal`?
Preliminary tests are ok and the doc build and display properly.
I'm currently running tests on sage/graphs/
. I'll let you know soon.
comment:5 Changed 4 years ago by
 Commit changed from a74b0ff454c22237989edef3078ae55552ccf02e to dc36f023927a79dea403e9112ae2935327bfe205
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
dc36f02  trac #19381: Typo

comment:6 Changed 4 years ago by
hey, your commit messages have the ticket number wrong...
comment:7 followup: ↓ 9 Changed 4 years ago by
For me the patch is good to go, but I don't know if Nathann has something to do about the commit ticket numbers...
Note: the (possible) segfault in the test src/sage/graphs
is independent from this patch and is resolved in #19337.
comment:8 Changed 4 years ago by
 Commit changed from dc36f023927a79dea403e9112ae2935327bfe205 to 9bdf527fd59509647ccefd86cbd87bb2e92071b4
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. This was a forced push. Last 10 new commits:
7a33fad  trac #19381: sparse6

efb842b  trac #19381: disclaimer

d9522bb  trac #19381: seidel adjacency matrix

f0f8ee4  trac #19381: adjacency matrix

7a51fde  trac #19381: Fix seidel adjacency

5abbd4b  trac #19381: Incidence matrix

cf7f515  trac #19381: dict_of_dicts

f9fc7a8  trac #19381: dict of lists

dd28d93  trac #19381: dig6

9bdf527  trac #19381: Typo

comment:9 in reply to: ↑ 7 Changed 4 years ago by
Replying to dcoudert:
For me the patch is good to go, but I don't know if Nathann has something to do about the commit ticket numbers...
well, he adds these numbers by hand. If you think it's OK, then it's OK with me, too.
Note: the (possible) segfault in the test
src/sage/graphs
is independent from this patch and is resolved in #19337.
comment:10 Changed 4 years ago by
 Reviewers set to David Coudert
 Status changed from needs_review to positive_review
Then let's go!
comment:11 Changed 4 years ago by
Thaaaaaaaaanks for this quick review O_O
Nathann
comment:12 Changed 4 years ago by
 Branch changed from u/ncohen/19381 to 9bdf527fd59509647ccefd86cbd87bb2e92071b4
 Resolution set to fixed
 Status changed from positive_review to closed
Last 10 new commits:
trac #19382: graph6
trac #19382: sparse6
trac #19382: disclaimer
trac #19382: seidel adjacency matrix
trac #19382: adjacency matrix
trac #19382: Fix seidel adjacency
trac #19382: Incidence matrix
trac #19382: dict_of_dicts
trac #19382: dict of lists
trac #19382: dig6