On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 10:47 AM, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
> some thoughts for inclusion:
>
> People working in combinatorial enumeration used to swear by nauty, there was
> no alternative, basically.
>
> It is a very solid plain C code, working on all sorts of platforms.
Excellent. I skimmed some
nauty is the classic in its field, just as PARI is in computational NT.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To
some thoughts for inclusion:
People working in combinatorial enumeration used to swear by nauty, there was
no alternative, basically.
It is a very solid plain C code, working on all sorts of platforms.
It probably beats alternatives to graph isomorphism testing in Sage.(needs a
check)
It has
On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 12:50 AM, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> On 2015-10-09 20:50, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
>>
>> Good to go? I suppose we need a formal vote to make the package
>> standard, right?
>
>
> Of course. It's not clear to me that it should be standard, by the way...
Indeed -- there are questi
> Of course. It's not clear to me that it should be standard, by the way...
+1 of course.
By the way, I know that some doctests are flagged "optional - nauty"
out there, so we must fix that on the way.
Nathann
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-
On 2015-10-09 20:50, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
Good to go? I suppose we need a formal vote to make the package
standard, right?
Of course. It's not clear to me that it should be standard, by the way...
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group
