Allow displaying plots when there are no alter-alter ties #98
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
krivit
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 4, 2025
…t-Conway (@mattwigway) for spotting it. references #98
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
When there are no alter-alter ties, displaying an ego graph fails (#86). This is because the weight for the ego-alter ties is set to the minimum weight of all ties currently in the graph, but in this case there are no ties in the graph. This fix adds a special case for that situation. If all weights are NA (or if the entire weights vector is NULL), the weight is set to 1 for all ties (including both the intended ego-alter ties, as well as any aaties with NA weights; modifying aaties with null weights is the previous behavior but this might not be desirable).
Also, just above the changed code there is the line
set.seed(1337). Is that intentional? Seems like it could cause unexpected results in external code that relies on random numbers and isn't expecting global RNG state to be modified.