Thank's Marvin. And a big thank's to WRI developers to finally taking care of those version 10 regressions in performance. Well done.

Hi,

Might I ask whether the bug I remarked in my post

"Graphs with multiple edges and problems with edges layouts and colouring"

has been solved in the new v10.3?

My understanding is that the posted issue is clearly a bug.

From the documentation in the Help, it can be understood that everything valid for an edge of a graph is also valid for all edges; there is no documented warning for any exception. So it may be considered a bug since some features either work or not depending on varying conditions and this is not documented. I would need the full feature available and if the answer is affirmative I would upgrade.

P.S.

Is there any way to insert links to other posts?

Szabolcs, thanks for your reply.

Yes, it seems that Wolfram has made a sound mistake on the very roots of the definition of the Mathaematica ‘Graph’ tool.

However, I gather from the appreciated, and smart, reply by Jaebum Jung in

http://community.wolfram.com/groups/-/m/t/603839?ppauth=qNrI6umO

that there would be a way out to the issue without need to expect a redefinition of the foundations of the concept.

In that direction, I wonder whether WRI could (or actually should) provide a free patch under the form of a package including a set of routines for the missing properties of the graphs with duplicated edges. After all, it is a latent or hidden vicious of the product, rather than an inadvertent mistake on a lateral or minor thing made by the designers.

For example, along with the available standard set of edges provided by ‘EdgeIndex’ (which 'ignores' the duplicated edges), a possible solution could be a standard package providing another internal or parallel an different index associated to the positions of the whole edges in the ‘EdgesList’). Solving the problem depicted in the image below (part of the notebook I attached in the link above)

There is no distinction between the first "M" \[DirectedEdge] "V" (in 'edgesRed') and the last  "M" \[DirectedEdge] "V" (in 'edgesPurple'). They carry the same name because they connect the same pair of vertices but they are in different contexts and are different objects.

(* edge indices of 'MVPQGraph' *)

ei = EdgeIndex[MVPQGraph, #] & /@ EdgeList[MVPQGraph]

{1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 3, 4, 13, 7, 10, 5}

(* position edge indices *)

pei = Flatten[Position[EdgeList[MVPQGraph], #] & /@ EdgeList[MVPQGraph]]

{1, 2, 3, 11, 4, 12, 5, 16, 6, 7, 14, 8, 9, 10, 15, 3, 11, 4, 12, 13, 7, 14, 10, 15, 5, 16}

The sophisticated solution proposed by Jaebum seems to set the way. I haven’t explored it in depth yet, but, in any a case it is too tricky for being of any use for the common Mathematica user or even for the advanced: I guess the Mathematica is a tool not an end for most of us.

It is my view in case it be of any use for the Community.

Martin.

Going to the actual Wolfram store and choosing upgrade allows me to enter my activation key which does give me the option to upgrade to Mathematica 10.3. That clears that up :)

You can report documentation problems online at the bottom of each page. In my experience, most things I report do tend to get corrected eventually, so I believe someone at WRI does read these reports.

Sorry, at the bottom of what page?

Thanks a lot. I was looking for it in the Online Help.

-Tomas

I cannot replicate the slowdown timings. You might want to check that the parallel kernels are actually launching and running.

Thanks. We have now replicated the slowdown and a bug report has been filed.

It was the issue, many thanks, David. By the way, I can have code captions e.g. in French, in Russian as well as in Chinese language flavours, even in Portuguese, but not yet in Italian :-)

Note that I have no idea if this is the issue... but it's the only thing I can find that may relate to your issue.