Opened 11 years ago
Closed 10 years ago
#7709 closed enhancement (fixed)
Graph constructor : Graph(edges=[ ... ] )
Reported by: | ncohen | Owned by: | rlm |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | major | Milestone: | sage-4.6.1 |
Component: | graph theory | Keywords: | |
Cc: | nthiery, rlm | Merged in: | sage-4.6.1.alpha1 |
Authors: | Nathann Cohen | Reviewers: | Robert Miller |
Report Upstream: | N/A | Work issues: | |
Branch: | Commit: | ||
Dependencies: | Stopgaps: |
Description
I often need to create graphs defined by a set of edges, and it should not be hard to add a new constructor of this shape :
g = Graph(edges=[ ... ] )
Nathann
Attachments (1)
Change History (16)
comment:1 Changed 11 years ago by
- Milestone changed from sage-4.3 to sage-4.3.1
comment:2 Changed 11 years ago by
- Status changed from new to needs_work
comment:3 Changed 11 years ago by
- Cc nthiery added
comment:4 Changed 10 years ago by
- Cc rlm added
- Status changed from needs_work to needs_info
comment:5 Changed 10 years ago by
Oh, by the way... This is no a new feature, as it was already possible to create a Graph by giving as an argument a list of edges, but until now it was forwarded to NetworkX..
Nathann
comment:6 Changed 10 years ago by
I think data.setdefault(u, [])
instead of if not u in data: data[u] = []
could make it a litte bit faster ;-)
comment:7 Changed 10 years ago by
Actually, I wondered... Faster to write, of course, but do you think it is also more efficient ? I had no idea, so I stuck to the most basic tools :-)
Nathann
comment:8 Changed 10 years ago by
sorry, forget my comment, data.setdefault(...[]).append(u) is slower than your solution.
comment:9 follow-up: ↓ 10 Changed 10 years ago by
I would change the ValueError? message to something much shorter and more comprehensive, such as "Edges input must all be of the same format" or length or something...
comment:10 in reply to: ↑ 9 Changed 10 years ago by
Replying to rlm:
I would change the ValueError? message to something much shorter and more comprehensive, such as "Edges input must all be of the same format" or length or something...
Also, the doctests don't expose this error.
comment:11 follow-up: ↓ 12 Changed 10 years ago by
I just updated the ticket to fix it ! Do you think this method is acceptable and I can now do the same for DiGraphs? ?
Nathann
comment:12 in reply to: ↑ 11 Changed 10 years ago by
Replying to ncohen:
I just updated the ticket to fix it ! Do you think this method is acceptable and I can now do the same for DiGraphs? ?
Nathann,
This looks good (maybe in the multiedges=False test you can show the list of edges afterward to demonstrate what actually happens). Please implement this in the DiGraph? case as well!
comment:13 Changed 10 years ago by
- Status changed from needs_info to needs_review
Here it is ! Actually, the constructor raises an exception when the same edge receives different labels with multiedges = False. I had forgotten to fill the doctests, as it was just a preview `:-)`
Nathann
Changed 10 years ago by
comment:14 Changed 10 years ago by
- Reviewers set to Robert Miller
- Status changed from needs_review to positive_review
comment:15 Changed 10 years ago by
- Merged in set to sage-4.6.1.alpha1
- Resolution set to fixed
- Status changed from positive_review to closed
Here is a patch to update graph.py. I have been sitting a while, trying to find a efficient way to write this, and found none, so I ended up converting it all to a dict_of_lists of dict_of_dicts... As it took some time to write, I would gladly ask for your advice before rewriting it all for digraphs.py (if you agree). Otherwise, let's try to find a better solution together :-)
Nathann