8000 Upgrade NT to parametric type by andgoldschmidt · Pull Request #86 · harmoniqs/NamedTrajectories.jl · GitHub
[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
Skip to content

Upgrade NT to parametric type #86

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
Merged
merged 21 commits into from
Jun 19, 2025
Merged

Upgrade NT to parametric type #86

merged 21 commits into from
Jun 19, 2025

Conversation

andgoldschmidt
Copy link
Member

Changelog:

  • NT as a parametric type avoids dynamic dispatch for components
  • Uses ranges for components to guarantee non-allocating views when accessing with comps
  • Refactors knot point as parametric, also
  • Requires free time
  • Sets global data to be relative to the global data, not the full trajectory datavec (no more index offset).

Some small changes to methods (could be breaking, e.g., there is no more in place add_component!, only add_component). The logic is now that data can be updated, but fields cannot. This is required when using parametric types.

Want feedback on whether gdata or global_data, gnames or global_names is the right naming style for the globals.

@codecov Codecov
Copy link
codecov bot commented Jun 9, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 77.74481% with 75 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
src/methods_named_trajectory.jl 79.39% 34 Missing ⚠️
src/struct_named_trajectory.jl 78.12% 21 Missing ⚠️
src/base_named_trajectory.jl 76.81% 16 Missing ⚠️
src/methods_knot_point.jl 0.00% 3 Missing ⚠️
ext/PlottingExt.jl 50.00% 1 Missing ⚠️

📢 Thoughts on this report? Let us know!

@andgoldschmidt
Copy link
Member Author

Still needs a docs update

@gennadiryan
Copy link
Member

Still needs a docs update

@andgoldschmidt The docs should now pass the build test; they're in feature/free-phases-docs. Let me know if I'm okay to merge that in and push to this branch!

@andgoldschmidt andgoldschmidt merged commit 19eda9c into main Jun 19, 2025
5 checks passed
This was referenced Jun 19, 2025
Closed
Closed
Closed
Closed
@andgoldschmidt andgoldschmidt deleted the feature/free-phases branch June 19, 2025 03:42
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@aarontrowbridge aarontrowbridge Awaiting requested review from aarontrowbridge

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
2 participants
@andgoldschmidt @gennadiryan
0