Hi Robert!
Thanks for your quick feedback!
Anyone else comments? Vincent is about to review the code.
On Tue, Feb 09, 2010 at 04:15:59PM -0800, Robert Miller wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 3:53 PM, Nicolas M. Thiery
> <nicolas.thi...@u-psud.fr> wrote:
> > Due to urgent needs for Sage days 20, I just rebased and worked
> > further on my patch for #7004:
> ...
> > * What should be the default layout algorithm?
> > * Planar layout when the graph is planar
>
> I wonder if this is a good idea. The Schnyder algorithm tends to
> make the graph, while technically embedded in a planar way, very
> hard to look at. I would think twice about using it by default
> (although everything is linear in the number of vertices, so it's
> not computationally a bad idea). I've often wondered about an
> adapted spring algorithm which preserved faces, to apply after
> Schnyder...
Ok, I'll just leave spring layout as default, until a fancy
planar/spring will get implemented.
Do you think you could have a couple spare minutes to spend on the
issue I am having with the ranked+spring layout? I must be misusing
spring_layout_fast, with its height = True argument, but am having a
hard time finding why. A working ranked+spring layout would be really
a great feature for all our posets and such.
Thanks in advance!
Cheers,
Nicolas
--
Nicolas M. Thiéry "Isil" <nthi...@users.sf.net>
http://Nicolas.Thiery.name/
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URL: http://www.sagemath.org
