-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 26
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 doNds #193
Refactor doNds #193
Conversation
@GateBuilder would you be interested in writing the tests? |
Here is already one I had used in another context: def test_do0d():
from qdev_wrappers.dataset.doNd import do0d, do1d
from qcodes.instrument.parameter import Parameter
from qcodes import config
from qcodes.utils import validators
config.user.mainfolder = "output" # set ouput folder for doNd's
s = Parameter('setter', set_cmd=None, get_cmd=None)
p = Parameter(
'test',
set_cmd=None,
get_cmd=lambda: 1+1j,
vals=validators.ComplexNumbers())
do1d(s, 0, 1, 1, 0, p)
do0d(p) |
) -> None: | ||
for parameter in param_meas: | ||
if isinstance(parameter, _BaseParameter): | ||
meas.register_parameter(parameter, |
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.
@Dominik-Vogel is it possible that we can handle array parameters separately to ensure they get saved as blobs in the database. This was the main reason this PR #166 exists and why most transmon people have been working out of that branch for almost a year.
The doNd functions in this form are completely unusable when doing anything with an arrayparameter (the overhead for saving is way too large).
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.
Good point! Thank you for notifying us!
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.
We will consider these in a new pr, to keep this one pure refactoring.
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.
@GateBuilder can you work on a test for this?
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.
Looks good thanks!
Lets create some tests to see if I broke anything ;-)