-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 33
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 ability to generate ER hypergraphs without multiedges #596
Conversation
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #596 +/- ##
========================================
Coverage 93.16% 93.17%
========================================
Files 60 62 +2
Lines 4523 4701 +178
========================================
+ Hits 4214 4380 +166
- Misses 309 321 +12 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
@arashbm --- does this fix the issue you raised? |
@maximelucas --- are you able to review this? |
Mainly a few comments about clarifying the code with comments! |
Co-authored-by: Maxime Lucas <maximelucas@users.noreply.github.com>
@maximelucas --- I believe I addressed all of your comments! |
xgi/generators/uniform.py
Outdated
|
||
Notes | ||
----- | ||
Because XGI only stores edges as sets, if self-loops are allowed, |
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.
But there's no option to allow (or not) self-loops is this function, right? I'm a bit confused. In any case, since that singleton {0} is always removed by the method, does it matter?
The multiedges option is not linked to that correct?
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 will try to clarify this sentence!
Thanks for the explanations! I'm still confused about some things, see above. Sorry for being a pain 😅 As long as the advantages are clear (and ideally why they are) we're good I guess. And that each method is clear from its own documentation. If I understand a bit better, the |
Co-authored-by: Maxime Lucas <maximelucas@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Maxime Lucas <maximelucas@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Maxime Lucas <maximelucas@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Maxime Lucas <maximelucas@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Maxime Lucas <maximelucas@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Maxime Lucas <maximelucas@users.noreply.github.com>
Yes, that's correct! I'll take a look at your more involved comments (hopefully today!) Thanks for the review! |
Thanks for all the comments!! |
This PR fixes #339.