Content deleted Content added
→Litmus Test: r |
unsigned, move new comment to bottom where it belongs |
||
Line 20:
: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 Test ==▼
It was stated when correcting something that was obviously incorrect in the path allgorithm, one should consider understanding the poorly written article as a "litmus test."▼
There is no litmus test. The article should be written clearly. It should be understandable and correct. It is not secret code for a select few. If this is not understood, David Esptein, then it is time for you to take some time off of wikipedia editing and do something else, like create the secret society of the Knights templer, or whatever.▼
Do not reverse the correction without a clear explanation of the ERROR that fixed the original version. If you feel passionate enough to insult people, then feel passionate enough to fix the error and to make the correction in the algorithm clear. Stop vandalizing the page▼
:Please see [[WP:COMPETENCE]] and please stop editing this article until you actually understand the algorithm. To be specific, the ''k''th stage of the algorithm finds paths whose interior vertices form a subset of the set of numbers from 1 to ''k''. The first stage finds paths whose interior vertices belong to the singleton set {1}, the second stage finds paths whose interior vertices belong to the set {1,2}, the third stage finds paths whose interior vertices belong to the set {1,2,3}, etc. For some reason this IP editor insists on replacing the set {1,2,3} by the number 3 in this description. It is an incorrect change, the article is correct as-is, and my repeated attempts at explanation (in the edit summaries) have fallen on deaf ears. —[[User:David Eppstein|David Eppstein]] ([[User talk:David Eppstein|talk]]) 22:58, 16 May 2015 (UTC)▼
== Negative Cycles ==
Line 45 ⟶ 36:
The point of Warshall's note (see references) is not to introduce Floyd's algorithm or any other variant based on elementwise operations - it is to use bit vector operations to achieve a running time of <math>O(n^2)</math> rather than <math>O(n^3)</math>. So Warshall's use of a Boolean matrix to represent the graph is not a minor implementation detail, it is essential to his contribution, and without it, the algorithm shouldn't carry his name. [[User:Rp|Rp]] ([[User talk:Rp|talk]]) 14:38, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
▲== Litmus Test ==
▲It was stated when correcting something that was obviously incorrect in the path allgorithm, one should consider understanding the poorly written article as a "litmus test."
▲There is no litmus test. The article should be written clearly. It should be understandable and correct. It is not secret code for a select few. If this is not understood, David Esptein, then it is time for you to take some time off of wikipedia editing and do something else, like create the secret society of the Knights templer, or whatever.
▲Do not reverse the correction without a clear explanation of the ERROR that fixed the original version. If you feel passionate enough to insult people, then feel passionate enough to fix the error and to make the correction in the algorithm clear. Stop vandalizing the page <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:96.57.23.82 |96.57.23.82 ]] ([[User talk:96.57.23.82 |talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/96.57.23.82 |contribs]]) </span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->
▲:Please see [[WP:COMPETENCE]] and please stop editing this article until you actually understand the algorithm. To be specific, the ''k''th stage of the algorithm finds paths whose interior vertices form a subset of the set of numbers from 1 to ''k''. The first stage finds paths whose interior vertices belong to the singleton set {1}, the second stage finds paths whose interior vertices belong to the set {1,2}, the third stage finds paths whose interior vertices belong to the set {1,2,3}, etc. For some reason this IP editor insists on replacing the set {1,2,3} by the number 3 in this description. It is an incorrect change, the article is correct as-is, and my repeated attempts at explanation (in the edit summaries) have fallen on deaf ears. —[[User:David Eppstein|David Eppstein]] ([[User talk:David Eppstein|talk]]) 22:58, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
| |||