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

refactor: Deduplicate get_expectation #448

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: develop
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

rht
Copy link
Contributor

@rht rht commented Jan 19, 2024

I have tested on both maxcut and hydrogen-lattice. They both work fine.

@rht
Copy link
Contributor Author

rht commented Jan 28, 2024

@rtvuser1 what are the concrete requirements for this PR to be merged? This is just a small step in my further attempt to make the benchmark code simpler and more readable.

@rtvuser1
Copy link
Collaborator

There is a larger question that comes up with this PR. There are no issues with the functionality you proposed.
However, there are many functions like this that should be consolidated. Before merging this PR, we want to consider it in the context of all the other related issues. There will be a contributor investigating this starting sometime early Feb, and we can merge your request as part of this. We are reluctant to add a new shared file with a name like "lib" (and the function within), without first considering the larger plan. Let us know if you would like to be involved in the discussion and planning on this.

@rht
Copy link
Contributor Author

rht commented Jan 29, 2024

We are reluctant to add a new shared file with a name like "lib" (and the function within), without first considering the larger plan. Let us know if you would like to be involved in the discussion and planning on this.

Yes, sounds good to me. But I'd appreciate if the discussion would have been more open regardless, given that this is an open-source project/repo. There are always eyeballs and potential contributors to the refactor effort.

@rtvuser1
Copy link
Collaborator

I would definitely like to take this up again shortly. I agree the discussion should be open. The improvement suggested by your PR is a good one.

@rht
Copy link
Contributor Author

rht commented Feb 13, 2024

Thank you! There are several benchmarking attempt out there (among the most recent ones being https://arxiv.org/abs/2401.09076). My take is that for QC-App-Oriented-Benchmarks to be the go-to place for people to look at, code clarity is essential.

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants