Simon Schölly
Simon Schölly
Maybe this could also be implemented without breaking changes, by having a function that calculates the edge rank for an edge. So maybe we do not need to wait for...
I wonder if it would make sense to have two different traits - one for mutable vertices, and one for mutable edges? Although I wonder how far it would make...
Yes, maybe it would make sense to have just a generic mutability trait in the beginning, and then we could add more later if needed.
What is the current status of this PR? I.e. who's turn is is to review/write code?
> > What is the current status of this PR? I.e. who's turn is is to review/write code? > > I was not aware we had defined turns, I thought...
I am not sure if I like this. For small graph it makes sense, but for larger graphs like your last example, I feel like it adds too much noise,...
That would indeed be a breaking change, but it is also very useful, as the current behavior always assumes that the added vertex has the identifier `nv(g)`. In the meantime...
@etiennedeg @vboussange This PR already looks quite good, but I think we need to fix a few things before we can merge it.
@etiennedeg @gdalle can I have your opinion on that? I think it is something that would be quite useful to have.
> @simonschoelly I think it's a really good idea, and it goes some of the way in clarifying interface specification. If I understand correctly, these types are just wrappers around...