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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Fix circuit rendering for long gate names #2127

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Fix circuit rendering for long gate names #2127

wants to merge 2 commits into from
+127 −2

Conversation

Pulkit1822
Copy link

@Pulkit1822 Pulkit1822 commented Jan 26, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Updated the circuit rendering to handle long gate names by dynamically adjusting column widths.

  • Circuit Rendering: Modified fmt_on_qubit_wire and fmt_on_classical_wire functions in compiler/qsc_circuit/src/circuit.rs to dynamically adjust the column width based on the gate label length.
  • Testing: Added a new test case in compiler/qsc_circuit/src/circuit/tests.rs to verify the rendering of long gate names in the circuit.
  • Notebook Update: Updated samples/notebooks/circuits.ipynb to include examples with long gate names and verify the rendering of the circuit.

@Pulkit1822
Fix circuit rendering for long gate names
e2aa4ab 
Update the circuit rendering to handle long gate names by dynamically adjusting column widths.

* **Circuit Rendering**: Modify `fmt_on_qubit_wire` and `fmt_on_classical_wire` functions in `compiler/qsc_circuit/src/circuit.rs` to dynamically adjust the column width based on the gate label length.
* **Testing**: Add a new test case in `compiler/qsc_circuit/src/circuit/tests.rs` to verify the rendering of long gate names in the circuit.
* **Notebook Update**: Update `samples/notebooks/circuits.ipynb` to include examples with long gate names and verify the rendering of the circuit.
@Pulkit1822
Copy link
Author

@Pulkit1822 please read the following Contributor License Agreement(CLA). If you agree with the CLA, please reply with the following information.

@microsoft-github-policy-service agree [company="{your company}"]

Options:

  • (default - no company specified) I have sole ownership of intellectual property rights to my Submissions and I am not making Submissions in the course of work for my employer.
@microsoft-github-policy-service agree
  • (when company given) I am making Submissions in the course of work for my employer (or my employer has intellectual property rights in my Submissions by contract or applicable law). I have permission from my employer to make Submissions and enter into this Agreement on behalf of my employer. By signing below, the defined term “You” includes me and my employer.
@microsoft-github-policy-service agree company="Microsoft"

Contributor License Agreement

@microsoft-github-policy-service agree

@minestarks
Copy link
Member

@Pulkit1822 thanks for the contribution! However the PR #2126 is further along and implements the intended behavior more correctly - so I'm inclined to take that PR over this one. Just wanted to let you know before you invest further time into this.

@Pulkit1822
Copy link
Author

@Pulkit1822 thanks for the contribution! However the PR #2126 is further along and implements the intended behavior more correctly - so I'm inclined to take that PR over this one. Just wanted to let you know before you invest further time into this.

Thank you for the update. I understand the decision to proceed with PR #2126 and appreciate you informing me. Please let me know if there are other areas where I can contribute. Thanks once again.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@billti billti billti left review comments

@DmitryVasilevsky DmitryVasilevsky Awaiting requested review from DmitryVasilevsky DmitryVasilevsky is a code owner

@sezna sezna Awaiting requested review from sezna sezna is a code owner

@swernli swernli Awaiting requested review from swernli swernli is a code owner

@idavis idavis Awaiting requested review from idavis idavis is a code owner

@minestarks minestarks Awaiting requested review from minestarks minestarks is a code owner

At least 2 approving reviews are required to merge this pull request.

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
3 participants
@Pulkit1822 @minestarks @billti