docs: cleanups, clarify (+test) connected components #180
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
acl-cqc
changed the title
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #180 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 83.55% 83.63% +0.08%
==========================================
Files 24 24
Lines 6317 6349 +32
Branches 6317 6349 +32
==========================================
+ Hits 5278 5310 +32
Misses 967 967
Partials 72 72 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
acl-cqc
changed the title
acl-cqc
changed the title
acl-cqc
force-pushed
the
acl/docs_cleanup
branch
from
1b20fa1 to
cd5a239
Compare
acl-cqc
changed the title
aborgna-q
reviewed
Feb 6, 2025
src/view.rs
Outdated
Comment on lines
455
to
456
| /// Iterates over the input neighbours of the `node`. | ||
| /// Shorthand for [`LinkView::neighbours`]`(`[`Direction::Incoming`]`)`. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| /// Iterates over the input neighbours of the `node`. | |
| /// Shorthand for [`LinkView::neighbours`]`(`[`Direction::Incoming`]`)`. | |
| /// Iterates over the input neighbours of the `node`. | |
| /// | |
| /// Shorthand for [`LinkView::neighbours`]`(`[`Direction::Incoming`]`)`. |
src/view.rs
Outdated
Comment on lines
463
to
464
| /// Iterates over the output neighbours of the `node`. | ||
| /// Shorthand for [`LinkView::neighbours`]`(`[`Direction::Outgoing`]`)`. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| /// Iterates over the output neighbours of the `node`. | |
| /// Shorthand for [`LinkView::neighbours`]`(`[`Direction::Outgoing`]`)`. | |
| /// Iterates over the output neighbours of the `node`. | |
| /// | |
| /// Shorthand for [`LinkView::neighbours`]`(`[`Direction::Outgoing`]`)`. |
src/view/subgraph.rs
Outdated
Comment on lines
48
to
51
| /// If both incoming and outgoing boundary edges are empty, the subgraph is taken | ||
| /// to be the entire graph (i.e. all components); otherwise, the subgraph | ||
| /// contains only the parts of those components of which the boundary includes | ||
| /// at least one edge (or disconnected port). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
May be more clear?
Suggested change
| /// If both incoming and outgoing boundary edges are empty, the subgraph is taken | |
| /// to be the entire graph (i.e. all components); otherwise, the subgraph | |
| /// contains only the parts of those components of which the boundary includes | |
| /// at least one edge (or disconnected port). | |
| /// If both incoming and outgoing boundary edges are empty, the subgraph is taken | |
| /// to be the entire graph (i.e. all components); otherwise, connected components that do not appear in the boundary will not be included. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I like "appear in the boundary" but rephrased to avoid the double negative (do not appear...will not be)
| @@ -42,8 +42,13 @@ use super::{MultiView, PortView}; | |||
| /// wall. The [Direction] of edges (incoming/outgoing) defines which side of | |||
| /// the wall is inside, and which is outside. | |||
| /// | |||
| /// If both incoming and outgoing boundary edges are empty, the subgraph is | |||
| /// taken to be the entire graph. | |||
| /// Note that if the graph contains multiple connected components, there may be | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Re-reading this definition, it seems to be describing the behaviour of Subgraph::new_subgraph rather than the structure itself.
(It's missing the arbitrary extra nodes).
Should we move this there, or add the optional closed connected components here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, good point. I kept the first bit here (introduction to the concept, boundary does not distinguish between two possibilities) and moved the rest to new_subgraph
CodSpeed Performance ReportMerging #180 will not alter performanceComparing Summary
|
aborgna-q
approved these changes
Feb 24, 2025
Merged
github-merge-queue bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 24, 2025
## 🤖 New release * `portgraph`: 0.13.1 -> 0.13.2 (✓ API compatible changes) <details><summary><i><b>Changelog</b></i></summary><p> <blockquote> ## [0.13.2](v0.13.1...v0.13.2) - 2025-02-24 ### Documentation - cleanups, clarify (+test) connected components (#180) ### New Features - add Subgraph::copy_in_parent (#182) ### Refactor - Simplify PortGraph::port_links (#188) </blockquote> </p></details> --- This PR was generated with [release-plz](https://github.com/release-plz/release-plz/).
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Most of this relates to the behaviour on connected components (the correct name - each component is connected), but a few other small doc fixes as, erm, I've not looked at any of the code for awhile....