-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 9
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
adds LigandNetwork.remove_edges #320
Open
richardjgowers
wants to merge
2
commits into
main
Choose a base branch
from
LigandNetwork_delete_edges
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,23 @@ | ||
**Added:** | ||
|
||
* added LigandNetwork.remove_edges | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. +1 to this getting into the change log |
||
|
||
**Changed:** | ||
|
||
* <news item> | ||
|
||
**Deprecated:** | ||
|
||
* <news item> | ||
|
||
**Removed:** | ||
|
||
* <news item> | ||
|
||
**Fixed:** | ||
|
||
* <news item> | ||
|
||
**Security:** | ||
|
||
* <news item> |
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
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.
How big of deal is this? Is it worth adding the complexity of checking to make sure we don't allow that? I can't remember what the rules are, if we allow creating a network that is disconnected, then I don't think we need a check, but if we require a connected network, then we want to make sure we don't let users put things into a inconsistent state.
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.
This is a good suggestion, I think :)
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.
Yeah I was 50/50 on what is best here. Currently disconnected graphs are "allowed" in a data structure sense, but they're often undesirable. It wouldn't be impossible to find and remove orphan nodes, but then the method isn't strictly "remove edges". I think I'll chicken out and add a kwarg that allows either, default being remove orphans.
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.
Ah yes, I was suggesting a more gentle "throw an error if removing this edge creates an orphan" or something so it can stay focused and do what it says on the tin, so I would be happy with kwargs that control things like, raising an error or not if it would create an orphan, and/or remove orphan(s) (this will be tricking if removing a edge creates 2 disconnect graphs, which one gets remove? the one with more nodes? -- maybe we can support the case where if it creates a single orphan, the default is to raise an error, but that can be suppressed, and additionally with another kwarg the orphan can be removed)