Alexander Condello

I agree. QBSolve pre-dates the notion of a composite, but conceptually you are absolutely correct. For another approach, I would check out [dwave-hybrid](https://github.com/dwavesystems/dwave-hybrid)'s [qbsolv-like](https://github.com/dwavesystems/dwave-hybrid/blob/master/examples/qbsolv-like.py) which will give you more control.

The `EmbeddingComposite` should not be used by QBSolv, the `FixedEmbeddingComposite` is preferred. See https://github.com/dwavesystems/qbsolv/blob/1e38d78aaa8ab5b80abe4e5b64c27620b8b8c0e5/examples/useFixedEmbeddingComposite.py#L1 That example should be updated to use `find_clique_embedding` in dwave-system and it should be referenced more...

Hi, thanks for the bug report! We'll update the example. For now, the instead of `e = list(r.energies())` try `e = list(r.record.energy)`

Hi @JeremLay , that does appear to be a bug. Would you like to make a PR with your proposed change?

We don't currently support it, though I don't think it would be especially difficult to make the change. https://github.com/dwavesystems/dwave-networkx/pull/200 actually does some of the work but I think that PR...

Yeah, there are two issues that need to be addressed: 1) Assign the appropriate edge weight based on the direction 2) Handle missing edges (if there are any) but the...

Not yet, but I will consider this a feature request!

For ``` import dwave_networkx as dnx import networkx as nx from dwave.system.samplers import DWaveSampler from dwave.system.composites import EmbeddingComposite G = nx.complete_graph(4) G.add_weighted_edges_from({(0, 1, 1), (0, 2, 2), (0, 3, 3),...

Also, for some of these algorithms the gap can be determined analytically, this information should also be exposed.

For tests, there are three obvious options: 1) Continue testing using the old namespace under the assumption that it covers both 2) Switch to testing the new namespace and just...