yeah! I'll pass on that one -- after all, you said, "if it's a good
algorithm, this one will blow up."
On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 5:21 PM, John Mayfield <john.wilkinson...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> And the CHEBI one? :p
>
> On 9 May 2017 at 22:43, Robert Hanson <hans...@stolaf.edu> wrote:
>
>> Thanks, again, John. That fix is checked in. I had forgotten to check
>> for r and s at other than the root atom.
>>
>> That reminds me to say that the BB validation suite is missing a lot of
>> good tests such as this one. So one really great contribution would be to
>> create an open validation set that would go far beyond the examples in the
>> BB.
>>
>> Bob
>>
>>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> ------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> Blueobelisk-discuss mailing list
> Blueobelisk-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/blueobelisk-discuss
>
>
--
Robert M. Hanson
Larson-Anderson Professor of Chemistry
St. Olaf College
Northfield, MN
http://www.stolaf.edu/people/hansonr
If nature does not answer first what we want,
it is better to take what answer we get.
-- Josiah Willard Gibbs, Lecture XXX, Monday, February 5, 1900
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Blueobelisk-discuss mailing list
Blueobelisk-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/blueobelisk-discuss
