Skip to content
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

Fix BFS Docstring #2318

Merged
merged 11 commits into from
Jun 1, 2022
Merged

Conversation

alexbarghi-nv
Copy link
Member

Corrects the BFS docstring by clarifying that multiple start vertices are accepted as long as they are from different components, and that passing start vertices from the same component will result in undefined behavior.

@alexbarghi-nv alexbarghi-nv added this to the 22.06 milestone May 31, 2022
@alexbarghi-nv alexbarghi-nv added non-breaking Non-breaking change doc Documentation labels May 31, 2022
@alexbarghi-nv alexbarghi-nv self-assigned this May 31, 2022
@alexbarghi-nv alexbarghi-nv marked this pull request as ready for review May 31, 2022 20:44
@alexbarghi-nv alexbarghi-nv requested a review from a team as a code owner May 31, 2022 20:44
start : Integer or list, optional (default=None)
The id of the graph vertex from which the traversal begins, or
if a list, the vertex from which the traversal begins in each
component of the graph. Passing in multiple start vertices
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If the current MG bfs call supports only 1 seed vertex per component, would it be better to instead say that the list option is unsupported as of this moment and add a FIXME in the code instead? Stating that certain parameters results in undefined behavior would be better suited for GitHub issues, rather than the user-friendly docs

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Same for the SG bfs call. Overall the PR looks good, so I can approve it later today

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

list is supported so long as no two vertices in the list are in the same component. I can remove the mention of undefined behavior and just state that.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I just changed it.

Copy link
Contributor

@betochimas betochimas left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good!

Copy link
Contributor

@jnke2016 jnke2016 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good to me

@BradReesWork
Copy link
Member

@gpucibot merge

@rapids-bot rapids-bot bot merged commit 0e03109 into rapidsai:branch-22.06 Jun 1, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
doc Documentation non-breaking Non-breaking change
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants