-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 454
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Implementing is_matching_covered()
and is_bicritical()
#38218
base: develop
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Documentation preview for this PR (built with commit 62285f6; changes) is ready! 🎉 |
This is the shape of the class. You now have to code and document it. In particular, don't forget to add in the description of the module what a matching covered graph is. |
Sure. Thanks for the feedback. 😊👍 I was wondering regarding the following:
Please correct me in case I missed something. |
yes this can be done, but in another PR. I fear that you might create a giant PR that will be very hard to review. |
Also,
it throws the following error:
which shall be resolved once
for the following example:
throws this for
This shows up in the local testing as well, but since it gave correct output |
Currently, method For the call to |
As I tried to explain earlier, I think that all methods related to matchings should be placed in a module called |
Sure. |
To fix "TypeError: |
You may use this trick during the development period, but it should not stay for the final version. |
73ab8b7
to
20aa1f1
Compare
May be, but not in this PR. It is bad practice to do too many things in a single PR as it makes it harder to review. |
Yes, it should be possible to replace |
In the above piece of code, I got the following error:
|
arghh, of course, it's not |
…yap/sage into matching_covered_graph
some tests are failing. |
…yap/sage into matching_covered_graph
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
one remaining minor comment. Otherwise LGTM.
It seems like there are other files for instance Shall we add them back in this PR itself? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
For each method moved from graph.py
to matching.py
, you must expose the method in graph.py
, as done for other methods at the bottom of the file.
I only doubt that exposing M_alternating_even_mark
in Graph
is useful. The method is too specific and can be accessed if needed anyway.
I suppose the inclusion of |
Or change calls from |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This looks good to me.
The objective of this issue is to implement
is_matching_covered()
andis_bicritical()
and to collect the matching related methods and to put them undermatching.py
.This PR introduces two methods pertaining to matching and aims to list out all matching related functions in
matching.py
. The two new methods are described below:is_matching_covered()
: Check if the graph is matching covered.is_bicritical()
: Check if the graph is bicritical.This PR addresses couple of missing functions and also addresses the lack of a separate file for matchings.
Fixes #38216.
📝 Checklist
⌛ Dependencies
Nothing as of now (up to my knowledge).
cc: @dcoudert.