Skip to content

Conversation

@ankurmagdum
Copy link
Contributor

Addresses #801

I wasn't entirely sure about where exactly to include Rule and RuleMatcher in tket, so have currently placed them in portmatching::matcher. Feedback on code correctness and/or documentation would be helpful. Meanwhile, I shall continue to add tests.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Oct 28, 2025

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 0% with 43 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 78.63%. Comparing base (b82c8ad) to head (6a2d1d0).
⚠️ Report is 5 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
tket/src/portmatching/matcher.rs 0.00% 43 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1208      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   78.60%   78.63%   +0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         151      153       +2     
  Lines       18264    18953     +689     
  Branches    17170    17851     +681     
==========================================
+ Hits        14357    14903     +546     
- Misses       3027     3108      +81     
- Partials      880      942      +62     
Flag Coverage Δ
python 92.65% <ø> (ø)
qis-compiler 68.40% <ø> (+0.31%) ⬆️
rust 78.22% <0.00%> (+0.03%) ⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

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

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@ankurmagdum
Copy link
Contributor Author

I have discovered an incompatibility issue with guppy-based Rule and the RuleMatcher.

In test_rule_matcher.py, two RuleMatchers are created. One with guppy and the other with pytket. Only the latter is able to enforce the replacement rule.

The difference between guppy and pytket is that the circuit corresponding to the guppy-based Rule has the pattern contained within a CFG node, which seems to be preventing the matcher from recognizing the lhs pattern in a target circuit.

It seems like this issue should be addressed in guppy instead of here. Please advice.

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

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant