On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 9:17 AM, Tom Boothby wrote:
> +1 to using Graph6 strings, and I'll review this tomorrow.
OK, the doctest is in the patch, and all ready for review.
--
Robert L. Miller
http://www.rlmiller.org/
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To u
+1 to using Graph6 strings, and I'll review this tomorrow.
On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 9:12 AM, Robert Miller wrote:
> Fixed!
>
> http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/9045
>
> Note that the patch does not yet have any doctests. I'm waiting on a
> better description of the graphs which caused the
Fixed!
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/9045
Note that the patch does not yet have any doctests. I'm waiting on a
better description of the graphs which caused the bug in the first
place. (Although we could use the graph6 strings for now, since having
this merged is probably pretty impor
On 25 Mai, 09:07, Robert Miller wrote:
combinations higher up.
> [...]
> Now that I understand the bug, my experience is it's best to sleep on
> it, and tackle fixing it tomorrow. This way I've given myself a nice
> outline towards doing that...
This is good practice not just for fixing bugs.
Can
