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

Commented out code in gexf.c #28

Open
ruebot opened this Issue Aug 27, 2018 · 4 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
2 participants
@ruebot
Member

ruebot commented Aug 27, 2018

There are a couple chunks of commented out code in src/gexf.c. Are they required, or can they be removed?

@ruebot ruebot added the question label Aug 27, 2018

@greebie

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@greebie

greebie Aug 27, 2018

Collaborator

The commented out code is to support building into Igraph. Igraph requires graph level attributes (eg. "totalNodes") to accept a PR, but the Gexf (even the 1.3) does not support graph-level attributes.

Since the schema for gexf is not rigidly enforced, it can be uncommented or removed without causing too much trouble.

The potential benefit to auk is if you would like to include some summary information in a sigma graph. For example, if you wanted to have some network summary information included in the visualisation.

In reality, I do not think it is high priority. I will fork the repo from HEAD and keep the leftover code there.

Collaborator

greebie commented Aug 27, 2018

The commented out code is to support building into Igraph. Igraph requires graph level attributes (eg. "totalNodes") to accept a PR, but the Gexf (even the 1.3) does not support graph-level attributes.

Since the schema for gexf is not rigidly enforced, it can be uncommented or removed without causing too much trouble.

The potential benefit to auk is if you would like to include some summary information in a sigma graph. For example, if you wanted to have some network summary information included in the visualisation.

In reality, I do not think it is high priority. I will fork the repo from HEAD and keep the leftover code there.

@ruebot

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@ruebot

ruebot Aug 27, 2018

Member

Sounds like it should be in a feature branch, and worked on there. Once it is ready, it can be pulled in the master.

Member

ruebot commented Aug 27, 2018

Sounds like it should be in a feature branch, and worked on there. Once it is ready, it can be pulled in the master.

@greebie

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@greebie

greebie Aug 27, 2018

Collaborator

That sounds like a good idea. I'll set one up.

Collaborator

greebie commented Aug 27, 2018

That sounds like a good idea. I'll set one up.

@ruebot

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment

ruebot added a commit to ruebot/graphpass that referenced this issue Aug 28, 2018

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment