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
IncidenceStructure.packing #16709
Comments
Branch: u/ncohen/16709 |
Dependencies: #16701 |
Commit: |
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. This was a forced push. New commits:
|
comment:4
LGTM. By the way, I noticed weirdness in |
Reviewer: Dima Pasechnik |
comment:5
PS. one ought to have .covering() too, not only .packing(). |
comment:6
Yo ! Thanks for the review !
Well, write a ticket if you care (I will review it), otherwise I'll do it someday. I was against it some time ago, but that was before Vincent's patch to renovate the incidence structure code. It used to be buggy and unmaintained, but now it is on a better road. Let's use it. Nathann |
comment:7
Same here, write a patch if you care (like for packing it only takes 10 lines of LP) otherwise it will be done someday. Though I hit packing problems much more often than covering ones, so it may not be tomorrow Nathann |
Changed branch from u/ncohen/16709 to |
comment:9
PDF Docs:
|
Changed commit from |
comment:10
|
Commit: |
Changed branch from |
comment:13
right, ; -> : |
Changed branch from u/ncohen/16709 to |
A Good Old ILP for a NP-Hard problem. Reminds me of the early days of Graphs in Sage
:-P
Nathann
Depends on #16701
CC: @videlec @KPanComputes @dimpase @brettpim
Component: combinatorial designs
Author: Nathann Cohen
Branch/Commit:
6edd826
Reviewer: Dima Pasechnik
Issue created by migration from https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/16709
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: