Add support for QuantinuumBackend constructed with offline data
#605
Conversation
| @@ -20,6 +20,12 @@ | |||
| from .api_wrappers import ( | |||
| QuantinuumAPIOffline as QuantinuumAPIOffline, # noqa: PLC0414 | |||
| ) | |||
| from .data import ( | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why is this aliasing needed here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I was following the existing pattern, but I can't see a reason for it. Will change these files.
|
|
||
|
|
||
| """Data characterizing H2 devices and emulators""" | ||
| H2 = QuantinuumBackendData( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pretty sure they do but do H2-1 and H2-2 have identical data fields?
| @@ -260,6 +261,12 @@ class _LocalEmulatorConfiguration: | |||
| noisy_simulation: bool | |||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
| class BackendOfflineError(Exception): | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So just to check will this error be given when the user attempts to make a call to process_circuits or something without specifying local_emulator=False in QuantinuumBackendData?
Could be worth adding an error message saying that L4 submisson is no longer supported and directing the user to Nexus instead.
Maybe thats a change for a follow up PR.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So just to check will this error be given when the user attempts to make a call to
process_circuitsor something without specifyinglocal_emulator=FalseinQuantinuumBackendData?
Yes, if the user provided a data parameter (and local_emulator=False).
Could be worth adding an error message saying that L4 submisson is no longer supported and directing the user to Nexus instead.
There is already a warning message given in this case; we do still want to support it for now.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Makes sense to me. Thanks Alec.
No description provided.