Adds sage.graphs.base.graph_backend to the documentation

[Nathann Cohen]

As the title says ! This patch does nothing smart.

Nathann

---

Apply to devel/sage: trac_14805.patch​

[Punarbasu Purkayastha]

Patchbot says "mmmm... tasty but can't digest; need rebase."

Edit: That's evil. You upload a new patch in the few seconds while I write. X-(

[Nathann Cohen]

Sorrysorry I just did ! ;-)

Nathann

[Punarbasu Purkayastha]

Can you add the following:

1. After every description iterator, add what it is an iterator of. In some cases it is clearly mentioned, whereas in other cases it is simply left as iterator.
2. There are some INPUT descriptions like this: - ``new`` -- boolean or None or - ``new`` -- string or None . I think it should be explicitly mentioned that None corresponds to retrieving the current value. In fact, I am very surprised how it works. The function definition should be like the definition below so that G.loops() gives the value straightaway, without having to enter None as a function argument:

   def loops(self, new=None):
   

It is a painful and extensive cleanup of that file. Thanks for the effort. :)

[Punarbasu Purkayastha]

3. There is this sentence which needs spaces around the =, otherwise the rendered output is weird.

   81	        If ``name``=``None``, the new vertex name is returned, ``None`` otherwise.
   
   784	        If ``name``=``None``, the new vertex name is returned. ``None`` otherwise.
   

4. This needs a double backticks; currently it is rendered in latex

   201	            label of `(u,v)`
   

5. It applied with one hunk at fuzz 2 against 5.11.beta3.

[Nathann Cohen]

Hellooooooo !

I just updated the patch (sorry for the delay, I had some problems with Sage because of #14737), and fixed all your points.

Except point 4, where I removed the backticks instead of adding them : the whole file is full of (u,v) without backticks, and to me marking them with double backticks makes less sense than writing them as LaTeX characters. To me an edge is a math thing.

Well, what do you think ? We can make it Python, Maths, or let it stay like that too :-)

Nathann

[Punarbasu Purkayastha]

Only one correction to suggest. In the correction to point 2, the `None` should not be under single backticks. I am ok with removing the backticks from (u,v).

[Punarbasu Purkayastha]

Oh sorry. there is another one of the point 2 type.

1362	        - ``new`` -- string or None 

[Nathann Cohen]

Gloops. Right. Patch updated !

Nathann

[Punarbasu Purkayastha]

Thanks. Looks good to me. :)

[Nathann Cohen]

Thanks for the review :-)

Nathann

[Punarbasu Purkayastha]

Why is the patchbot unable to apply to 5.11b3? I applied to 5.11b3 and it worked except for the fuzz.

[Nathann Cohen]

It is probably an old version. The one I uploaded when you quoted the patchbot, yesterday.

Nathann

[Punarbasu Purkayastha]

Let's kick the patchbot.

Apply trac_14805.patch

[Nathann Cohen]

Underfed, then kicked.

We really should treat it better.

Nathann

[Punarbasu Purkayastha]

Replying to ncohen:

Underfed, then kicked.

We really should treat it better.

Nathann

"C'est la vie" :-P

[Nathann Cohen]

"C'est la vie" :-P

In life you have to kick back if people treat you like that :-P

Nathann