Talk:Floyd–Warshall algorithm: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 08:04, 17 April 2018

Revision as of 01:41, 18 April 2018

Line 10:

{{WikiProject Computer science|class=B|importance=high}}

{{archives}}

== Path reconstruction Incorrect ==

The Path reconstruction pseudocode never populates the 'next' variable with anything but null and so it cannot find any paths. [[Special:Contributions/67.172.248.52|67.172.248.52]] ([[User talk:67.172.248.52|talk]]) 16:19, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

:This section has undergone several iterations since this comment was made. [[Special:Contributions/98.209.119.23|98.209.119.23]] ([[User talk:98.209.119.23|talk]]) 22:05, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

==Litmus Testing==

My correction of the Floyd Algorithm are correct. The entire artcle needs a rewrite to be both understandable and correct. As it remains, it is confusing my students and I spend a lot of time correcting their errors gleaned from this article. This is a simple to understand algorithm when explained clearly. Instead we don't only have mathematical snobbery, but truly inaccurate information. I am SICK of wikipeadia inability to just tell wrong from write. Mathematical truth is not a matter of a VOTE. When k = 1, it is not equal to zero. Fixing this page requires a complete rewrite because the graph and the agorthms don't match and the explanation doesn't inform the reader of facts. Not having fixed these problems in the article has been called not passing a litmus test. The only litmus test here is if the article is informative and educational. It is NOT. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.57.23.82 (talk) 02:16, 17 May 2015 (UTC) <small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/96.57.23.82|96.57.23.82]] ([[User talk:96.57.23.82|talk]]) </small><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Simpler path reconstruction ==

I have changed the path reconstruction such that the next array is updated in the main loop. This saves us the trouble of using extra procedures and illustrates a common dynamic programming pattern. [[User:Thomasda|Thomasda]] ([[User talk:Thomasda|talk]]) 20:31, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

==Is there a bug in the main loop? ==