Pad random graphs with 0s so they are in the right order

[KirstieJane]

It doesn't make sense to report the random graphs in this order, and I think it could cause some confusions in certain use cases.

I think we should pad the random graphs with 0s so they're numbered:

• R0000
• R0001
• R0002
• R0003

etc

I'm happy to take suggestions for the number of 0s to pad with. 10,000 random graphs would need 5 characters: R00001 ---> R10000, which seems pretty sensible to me.

What do you think?

[wingedRuslan]

well, if it could possibly cause some confusions in certain use cases, we should make changes to the order by renaming random graphs

Do you suggest instead of "Real_Graph_R0" --> "Real_Graph_R1000" to have "R0000" --> "R1000" for 1000 random graphs?

[KirstieJane]

Yes - exactly 👍

[wingedRuslan]

How should the number of digits be allocated?

if we create 1000 random graphs -> then 4 digits, 10 000 -> 5 digits?

[Islast]

It seems like the problem here might be that the graphbundle is inherently unordered (its base type is a dict). Following the work we did on permuting groups, it's beginning to seem like the dict class is not ideal for graph bundle.