Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Make cluster_structural_equivalence handle isolates better #149

Closed
jhollway opened this issue Nov 10, 2021 · 0 comments · Fixed by #181
Closed

Make cluster_structural_equivalence handle isolates better #149

jhollway opened this issue Nov 10, 2021 · 0 comments · Fixed by #181
Assignees
@jhollway
Labels
bug Something isn't working feature_request Requests for new functionality

Comments

@jhollway
Copy link
Collaborator

At the moment they either trigger an error (older versions) or are deleted entirely.

Perhaps it would make more sense to create an artificial class for all isolates?
@jhollway jhollway added bug Something isn't working feature_request Requests for new functionality labels Nov 10, 2021
@jhollway jhollway self-assigned this Nov 10, 2021
jhollway added a commit that referenced this issue Dec 18, 2021
@jhollway
Closed #149 by adding extra column to node_tie_census in `cluster_str…
4ba0f47 
…uctural_equivalence()` for isolates, note that this renders all isolates structurally equivalent
@jhollway jhollway mentioned this issue Dec 18, 2021
Merged
13 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@jhollway jhollway

Labels
bug Something isn't working feature_request Requests for new functionality
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

Improved how cluster_structural_equivalence handles isolates stocnet/migraph
1 participant
@jhollway