Make architecture field optional in BackendInfo #1106
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
cqc-alec
approved these changes
Nov 2, 2023
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM. After merging this we should make a release candidate and check if it breaks any of the extensions.
Ideally I would say nodes and n_nodes should be None, but that increases the chances of breaking dependencies' assumptions, so for now I would leave as is (so that they match current values).
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
We should avoid using
Architecture([])to specify unconstrained architectures for some simulator backends. This PR makes the architecture field inBackendInfooptional.I think this is a API breaking change, but I'm not sure whether or how to provide a deprecation path. Any ideas are welcome!I'm not sure if this is an API breaking change. I'm also not so sure about what the correct behaviour ofnodes()andn_nodes()should be when thearchitecturefield is missing . Potentially we can allow them to returnNoneas well.