Incorrect behaviour in findCycles (unexistent edges)

[ErunamoJAZZ]

I found a strange case where findeCycles returns a wrong response.

This is what g.edges() show:

[ { v: '3', w: '1' },
  { v: '9', w: '5' },
  { v: '8', w: '9' },
  { v: '18', w: '6' },
  { v: '19', w: '4' },
  { v: '19', w: '5' },
  { v: '21', w: '6' },
  { v: '21', w: '9' },
  { v: '23', w: '22' },
  { v: '23', w: '21' },
  { v: '23', w: '10' },
  { v: '18', w: '23' },
  { v: '18', w: '7' },
  { v: '27', w: '21' },
  { v: '27', w: '19' },
  { v: '27', w: '18' },
  { v: '5', w: '6' },
  { v: '5', w: '27' },
  { v: '49', w: '27' },
  { v: '4', w: '54' },
  { v: '3', w: '21' },
  { v: '4', w: '55' },
  { v: '55', w: '56' },
  { v: '53', w: '56' },
  { v: '54', w: '56' },
  { v: '52', w: '56' },
  { v: '50', w: '56' },
  { v: '51', w: '56' },
  { v: '3', w: '55' },
  { v: '35', w: '26' },
  { v: '1', w: '59' },
  { v: '2', w: '59' },
  { v: '2', w: '58' },
  { v: '1', w: '58' },
  { v: '1', w: '56' },
  { v: '2', w: '56' },
  { v: '59', w: '1' },
  { v: '58', w: '1' },
  { v: '35', w: '1' },
  { v: '57', w: '1' },
  { v: '56', w: '1' },
  { v: '1', w: '53' },
  { v: '2', w: '53' },
  { v: '58', w: '2' },
  { v: '59', w: '2' },
  { v: '57', w: '2' },
  { v: '56', w: '2' },
  { v: '35', w: '2' },
  { v: '3', w: '2' },
  { v: '1', w: '55' },
  { v: '2', w: '55' },
  { v: '59', w: '6' },
  { v: '58', w: '6' },
  { v: '57', w: '6' },
  { v: '56', w: '6' },
  { v: '35', w: '6' },
  { v: '3', w: '6' },
  { v: '2', w: '54' },
  { v: '1', w: '54' },
  { v: '59', w: '54' },
  { v: '3', w: '54' },
  { v: '58', w: '54' },
  { v: '57', w: '54' },
  { v: '56', w: '54' },
  { v: '35', w: '54' } ]

And this is what alg.findCycles(g) returns:

[ [ '59', '58', '55', '54', '2', '56', '53', '1' ], [ '19', '23', '18', '27', '5', '9', '21' ] ]

As you can see, most of edges are fine compared to the cycles found, but by example, there is not a relation between '59' and '58'!

I am not sure why it is happening, but I will let this case here, maybe someone will found what is happening here.

[antoinerg]

@ErunamoJAZZ It seems to me that although 59 and 58 are not directly connected, they still form a cycle through their connections to 1:

{ v: '1', w: '58' },
{ v: '58', w: '1' },
{ v: '1', w: '59' },
{ v: '59', w: '1' },

Please correct me if I'm wrong but I think the result is correct.

[ErunamoJAZZ]

Nice, it is true that it could explain why the algorithm found that response, thank you antoinerg.
But anyway, it is an unexpected behavior of what I understand for a cycle over a directed graph.

In this function I thought in a simple cycle or directed cycle, not in a circuit (following the terms used in wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cycle_(graph_theory) ).

So, even knowing why, it still being a wrong result for our usercase.