[UnitaryHack]Barrier and Delays

[Manvi-Agrawal]

Issue , if available:

Fixes #974

Testing done:

• Unit test coverage is 100%.
• Running this code produces this QASM code

from braket.circuits import Circuit

circ = Circuit().barrier([0, 1, 2])
circ = Circuit().delay([0, 1, 2], 30)

print(circ.to_ir("OPENQASM").source)

OUTPUT

OPENQASM 3.0;
bit[3] b;
qubit[3] q;
delay[30 s] q[0], q[1], q[2];
b[0] = measure q[0];
b[1] = measure q[1];
b[2] = measure q[2];

Merge Checklist

Put an x in the boxes that apply. You can also fill these out after creating the PR. If you're unsure about any of them, don't hesitate to ask. We're here to help! This is simply a reminder of what we are going to look for before merging your pull request.

General

• I have read the CONTRIBUTING doc
• I used the commit message format described in CONTRIBUTING
• I have updated any necessary documentation, including READMEs and API docs (if appropriate)

Tests

• I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works (if appropriate)
• I have checked that my tests are not configured for a specific region or account (if appropriate)

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 68.96552% with 9 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 99.89%. Comparing base (1c46ca7) to head (deb0202).
Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

❗ Current head deb0202 differs from pull request most recent head 86bb75f

Please upload reports for the commit 86bb75f to get more accurate results.

Files	Patch %	Lines
src/braket/circuits/gates.py	68.96%	9 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##              main     #980      +/-   ##
===========================================
- Coverage   100.00%   99.89%   -0.11%     
===========================================
  Files          135      135              
  Lines         8920     8948      +28     
  Branches      2002     2012      +10     
===========================================
+ Hits          8920     8939      +19     
- Misses           0        9       +9     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[rmshaffer]

Thanks for taking this on! If you'd like to continue toward merging this, please ensure that you add tests to validate the new functionality and reach 100% code coverage. You can use tox to run linters and unit tests locally.

[Manvi-Agrawal]

Thanks for taking this on! If you'd like to continue toward merging this, please ensure that you add tests to validate the new functionality and reach 100% code coverage.

Hi @rmshaffer , I did some changes in the test file and the input file. I could get some unit tests passing for Barrier but not Delay. Its complaining about missing parameter "duration".

Q1. Schema modification in amazon-braket-schemas doesnt work

• Step 1: Cloning the amazon-braket-schemas repo and adding below class.

class Duration(BaseModel):
    duration: confloat(ge=0)

• Step 2: Installed editable version of amazon-braket-schemas by running pip install -e . in amazon-braket-schemas.

• Step 3: Run the Unit tests in this repo(aka amazon-braket-sdk-python). They still failed

  Q2: Bind values

  And its confusing to me how do we decide whether to use bind_values or not. Gates derieved from AngledGate call bind_values function but Unitary gate which takes 2D matrix, has TwoDimensionalMatrix at amazon-braket-schemas repo

[Manvi-Agrawal]

Hi @rmshaffer , did you get a chance to look into this?

[Manvi-Agrawal]

Hi @rmshaffer , the coverage is now 100%. For now, I have added Duration class here. Could you please help regarding this?

PS: Working to fix tests. I realized that OpenQASM isnt working

[Manvi-Agrawal]

Hi @rmshaffer , I have raised #993 which has 100% test coverage so that I can follow commit message format. I didnt want to do git rebase. Could you please review it?

[Manvi-Agrawal]

@rmshaffer , created #992 to use the commit format as prescibed.

[rmshaffer]

@rmshaffer , created #992 to use the commit format as prescibed.

The commit format is actually referring to the PR title, which is what becomes the commit title when the PR is squashed and merged. (The individual commits in the PR will disappear anyway when they are squashed and merged.)

[rmshaffer]

Closing this PR in favor of #992

[Manvi-Agrawal]

The commit format is actually referring to the PR title, which is what becomes the commit title when the PR is squashed and merged. (The individual commits in the PR will disappear anyway when they are squashed and merged.)

Thanks @rmshaffer for the clarification. I saw a couple of merged PRs like (https://github.com/amazon-braket/amazon-braket-sdk-python/pull/977/commits) which was following this convention

Do you think we can update the contributing doc and merge checklist to account for this fact, so that it doesnt confuse new people like me? Currently, merge checklist explicitly says: I used the commit message format described in CONTRIBUTING. Maybe say that I used the PR title format described in CONTRIBUTING to make it more clear. Thoughts?