-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 18
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Add parallel version of edge_betweenness_centrality #60
Add parallel version of edge_betweenness_centrality #60
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks @jkrajniak!
I've left a few comments below. LMK what u think.
And there are a few linting errors in this PR which you will be able to see once a maintainer approves running the wf test. you can run black .
to get rid of most of them.
nx_parallel/algorithms/centrality/tests/test_betweenness_centrality.py
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for the changes @jkrajniak!
I've added a few comments below. Thanks!
nx_parallel/algorithms/centrality/tests/test_betweenness_centrality.py
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Looks like all tests pass now. @Schefflera-Arboricola can you check your comments as "resolved" -- or leave more comments, or another review. When it's ready, select the "Approve" button while leaving a review. |
nx_parallel/algorithms/centrality/tests/test_betweenness_centrality.py
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
no, I think only the author or maintainers can do that. |
You can just click on the "Resolve conversation" button for each of the comments. |
Unless there is no button that says "Resolve conversation". :} I think github only allows resolving conversations for maintainers and the original poster. We are working on getting maintainer status for @Schefflera-Arboricola -- proper channels and all that. Meanwhile I resolved those that I think have been addressed. I wasn't sure about one where |
for i in ebc: | ||
nodes_ebc[i[0]] += ebc[i] | ||
nodes_ebc[i[1]] += ebc[i] | ||
def get_chunk_function(ebc): |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't think there is any need for 2 functions here(i.e. get_chunk_function
and get_chunk
) and ebc
doesn't need to be passed as it is already in the outer function's namespace. LMK what you think. Thanks!
Thanks!
There were no style changes(or any changes) in that file. I'm not sure what @jkrajniak was referring to there. |
I am assuming that we don't get to see the changes. They were probably made by pre-commit locally before pushed to the repo -- so we would not see them. It all looks good from my perspective too, so I will resolve that comment. Thanks! |
f2c4950
to
e0d937f
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thank you @jkrajniak :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good to me! Thanks!
This adds parallel setup for https://networkx.org/documentation/stable/reference/algorithms/generated/networkx.algorithms.centrality.edge_betweenness_centrality.html