Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[Feature] Implement a State result type #5

Open
3 tasks
Doomsk opened this issue May 24, 2024 · 6 comments
Open
3 tasks

[Feature] Implement a State result type #5

Doomsk opened this issue May 24, 2024 · 6 comments
Labels

Comments

@Doomsk
Copy link
Member

Doomsk commented May 24, 2024

To allow the handling of:

Unfinished prototype here


@Roland-djee cloning the same issue from qadence-core in here. Both places should be involved in this endeavor.

@RolandMacDoland
Copy link
Contributor

@Doomsk is this still relevant ? Or will it be handled by the runtime ?

@Doomsk
Copy link
Member Author

Doomsk commented Jul 4, 2024

@Doomsk is this still relevant ? Or will it be handled by the runtime ?

@Roland-djee the state result type should be included in the RuntimeInterface. However, it's up to each backend to implement/provide it correctly. Thus, on the RuntimeInterfaceApi we refer generically to a TypeVar that expects the
backend's side RuntimeInterface implementation to define which those results are.

@RolandMacDoland
Copy link
Contributor

@Doomsk is this still relevant ? Or will it be handled by the runtime ?

@Roland-djee the state result type should be included in the RuntimeInterface. However, it's up to each backend to implement/provide it correctly. Thus, on the RuntimeInterfaceApi we refer generically to a TypeVar that expects the backend's side RuntimeInterface implementation to define which those results are.

I guess my question was more: is the RuntimeInterfaceAPI already drafted somewhere ?

@RolandMacDoland RolandMacDoland changed the title [Proto] Implement a State result type [Feature] Implement a State result type Jul 4, 2024
@Doomsk
Copy link
Member Author

Doomsk commented Jul 4, 2024

@Doomsk is this still relevant ? Or will it be handled by the runtime ?

@Roland-djee the state result type should be included in the RuntimeInterface. However, it's up to each backend to implement/provide it correctly. Thus, on the RuntimeInterfaceApi we refer generically to a TypeVar that expects the backend's side RuntimeInterface implementation to define which those results are.

I guess my question was more: is the RuntimeInterfaceAPI already drafted somewhere ?

yes! you can find it on this branch (which is in this PR)
working examples are found on the tests folder, for pyq and pulser. Note that pyq has the old version of Dominik's implementation (for the sake of comparison and benchmarking; will be removed before merging) as well

@Doomsk
Copy link
Member Author

Doomsk commented Jul 22, 2024

@Roland-djee the same issue from core is also here to keep track on the results

@RolandMacDoland
Copy link
Contributor

@Roland-djee the same issue from core is also here to keep track on the results

Indeed, will close the other, thanks.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants