On Sat, 14 Oct 2017, david.coud...@inria.fr wrote:
It seems that "traceable graph" is more common (by googling), but then it
seems very natural to have is_eulerian/is_semi_eulerian and
is_hamiltonian/is_semi_hamiltonian. Opinions?
We can do that, but first we have to agree on the definitions f
Hi,
In sagenb one can hide list of command to make a result, I can't do that in
jupyter notebook is there a way ?
I do geometry examples with sagemath, sure I could use other software but I
prefer use sagemath because by hand I can notice lot of interesting
construction. Another thing I would li
> It seems that "traceable graph" is more common (by googling), but then it
> seems very natural to have is_eulerian/is_semi_eulerian and
> is_hamiltonian/is_semi_hamiltonian. Opinions?
>
We can do that, but first we have to agree on the definitions for both
eulerian/hamiltonian path/cycle,
How can we be sure that new code witten by people (like me) who are
not python2/3 experts does not regress?
Also, I can see that projects which build on top of Sage will one day
have to make sure that their code is all python3-compliant (I am
thinking of the LMFDB). What's the simplest way of tes
On Sat, 14 Oct 2017, david.coud...@inria.fr wrote:
I took some more time to thought about the will of unifying these behaviors
(which is a good idea) and I now
believe it is not a good idea to use the same method / term to check if the
graph has a hamiltonian cycle
or a hamiltonian path. Doin
I took some more time to thought about the will of unifying these behaviors
(which is a good idea) and I now believe it is not a good idea to use the
same method / term to check if the graph has a hamiltonian cycle or a
hamiltonian path. Doing so, we are making methods more complicated and
int
