Opened 16 years ago
Closed 16 years ago
#187 closed defect (fixed)
DijkstraWidestPathOperationTraits
| Reported by: | Peter Kovacs | Owned by: | Balazs Dezso |
|---|---|---|---|
| Priority: | minor | Milestone: | LEMON 1.1 release |
| Component: | core | Version: | hg main |
| Keywords: | Cc: | ||
| Revision id: |
Description
Do we really need this class in dijkstra.h? Or it should rather be an example in the tutorial?
Btw. I think there is a bug in it, namely < should be > in the less() function. Am I right?
Attachments (1)
Change History (10)
comment:1 follow-up: 2 Changed 16 years ago by
comment:2 follow-up: 3 Changed 16 years ago by
Replying to deba:
Replying to kpeter:
Do we really need this class in dijkstra.h? Or it should rather be an example in the tutorial?
Yes, I think we could remove it from the trunk.
Btw. I think there is a bug in it, namely
<should be>in theless()function. Am I right?Yes, it should be >.
And what about lemon-1.0? Is it there?
comment:3 follow-up: 4 Changed 16 years ago by
Replying to alpar:
And what about lemon-1.0? Is it there?
Yes it is. As far as I remember it is not the first time I suggested to remove it (and to fix the bug), but it was forgotten.
comment:4 follow-up: 5 Changed 16 years ago by
Replying to kpeter:
Replying to alpar:
And what about lemon-1.0? Is it there?
Yes it is.
Hmmm... What about "backward compatibility", then? Shall we forget about it for a moment? Shall we cause bad days and bad nights for a lot of LEMON users? :)
As far as I remember it is not the first time I suggested to remove it (and to fix the bug), but it was forgotten.
Did you do it in a ticket? If yes, it is really bad.
comment:5 follow-up: 6 Changed 16 years ago by
Replying to alpar:
Hmmm... What about "backward compatibility", then? Shall we forget about it for a moment?
Maybe. :)
Shall we cause bad days and bad nights for a lot of LEMON users? :)
Since there is a major bug in it I suppose that nobody have used this class neither in the 0.x series nor in LEMON 1.0.
As far as I remember it is not the first time I suggested to remove it (and to fix the bug), but it was forgotten.
Did you do it in a ticket? If yes, it is really bad.
No, I just wrote it to you in two emails (2008.08.03. 14:25, 2008.08.29. 5:50).
comment:6 follow-up: 7 Changed 16 years ago by
Replying to kpeter:
Since there is a major bug in it I suppose that nobody have used this class neither in the 0.x series nor in LEMON 1.0.
Please send the patch, then.
Did you do it in a ticket? If yes, it is really bad.
No, I just wrote it to you in two emails (2008.08.03. 14:25, 2008.08.29. 5:50).
Then you should have known that it is in danger of being forgotten. :)
comment:7 Changed 16 years ago by
Changed 16 years ago by
| Attachment: | 62f9787c516c.patch added |
|---|
comment:9 Changed 16 years ago by
| Resolution: | → fixed |
|---|---|
| Status: | new → closed |
Replying to kpeter:
Yes, I think we could remove it from the trunk.
Yes, it should be >.