Resolves #7 #8 #10 additional comment for #4/#11 #12
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
-improved Full View functionality -fixed Full View resizing multiple times under certain circumstances -changed default window creation size to 1280x720 px
-as gpt recommended changed subprocess shell script to start file ~Add option to open state_diagram_graph.png in window/engine?
#6 -removed declared but unused Analysis mode remnants -removed unused variables and imports
From e066839f6992f87db220ac98d7219dcacd218977 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Daniel Konsek <[email protected]> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2024 11:48:52 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] [check-spelling] Update metadata check-spelling run (push) for main Signed-off-by: check-spelling-bot <[email protected]> on-behalf-of: @check-spelling <[email protected]> --- .github/actions/spelling/expect.txt | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) diff --git a/.github/actions/spelling/expect.txt b/.github/actions/spelling/expect.txt index e69de29..4bc1aef 100644 --- a/.github/actions/spelling/expect.txt +++ b/.github/actions/spelling/expect.txt @@ -0,0 +1 @@ +startfile -- 2.43.2 @@@@da39a3ee5e6b4b0d3255bfef95601890afd80709--1713181732
Resolved: Check Spelling +startfile JSCPD +2 code duplication treshold Black addressed formating Flake8 f-String formating Isort Import order/formating Mypy added Type notations PYLINT ignored E1101 caused by linter.yml 12
| ) | ||
| messagebox.showinfo( | ||
| "Invalid Transition", | ||
| f"Cannot transition from {current} to (within) {state}", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What happened to this messagebox output? It seems gone after the refactoring.
| ) | ||
| messagebox.showinfo( | ||
| "Invalid Transition", | ||
| f"Cannot transition from {current} to anywhere (outside)", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This file isn't actually used in the README?
This was referenced Jun 21, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Resolves #7
Resolves #8
Resolves #10
Resolves #4 #11Problem: perform_longest_path_analysis() and perform_max_transition_path_analysis() produce wrong results for certain graphs.
Error analysis:
UML state diagrams are graphs with the following attributes:
The current approach perform_longest_path_analysis() uses:
naive BFS avoiding already-visited transitions
-> does not work for cyclic graphs such as example6.svg
Example G={V,E}
V={A,B,C,D}
E={{A,B},{B,C},{B,D},{C,A}}
will result in trace: {A,B},{B,C},{C,A} instead of {A,B},{B,C},{C,A,},{A,B},{B,C}
Tried solutions:
Minimum Spanning Tree (MST) + Shortest Pathdoes not work on directed graphsRepeated Nearest Neighbor Algorithmrequires a weighted graphProposed solution: minimum-cost arborescence via Edmonds' algorithm
perform_max_transition_path_analysis() has the same issue.