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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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
cirq_google.GridDevice, minus gateset and gate durations #5203
cirq_google.GridDevice, minus gateset and gate durations #5203
Changes from all commits
eb325eb
a4c9e19
8d1339d
8d4498e
13eb9fa
22512c5
624f1fa
bb71a82
1831706
1a0c141
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Can we get rid of the coverage: ignore here and below?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I added them because these lines are currently unreachable if everything works correctly, and only act as a last line of defense.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Can we add a test which gives a bad input that triggers this condition?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The same conditions that would trigger this exception would also cause
DeviceSpecification
validation to fail, so this is captured by the testtest_grid_device_invalid_device_specification
. If validation is buggy and this exception here is triggered, the test should get an exception but will fail because there's an error pattern mismatch.Per @MichaelBroughton 's suggestion I added spec validation logic at the top of
from_proto
to make it explicit that errors that would've causedGridDeviceMetadata
instantiation to fail are due to an invalidDeviceSpecification
.Will update the error match patterns to include "Invalid DeviceSpecification" to make sure that validation error messages are matched instead of the GridDeviceMetadata ones, in case error messages accidentally match up in the future between the two.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is it even worth having the ValueError catching if unreachable?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think so - it would protect against future bugs in validation logic. For example, when GridDeviceMetadata gets an additional constraint but validation isn't updated, it's useful to give users the hint that the error they are getting is due to the DeviceSpecification being invalid rather than a mistake they made.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I also think we should remove this check since the code path is unreachable.
We can add an assertion instead if we want to make sure we catch the inconsistencies between validation logic vs new constraints in GridDeviceMetadata but I'm not sure if putting everything under the umbrella of device specification errors is the right thing to do in this case.