Currently, most samples only have a C# host program. It would be nice if more or even most samples demonstrated how to use Python to call into Q#.

Samples with Python Hosts

• algorithms
  • chsh-game
  • database-search
  • integer-factorization
  • oracle-synthesis
  • order-finding
  • reversible-logic-synthesis
  • simple-grover

• arithmetic

It has been requested that I add the array_to_latex tool from the textbook package to qiskit. I will need some assistance with how / where is best to add this, as well as bringing to code up to qiskit's standard before I ma

Q# evolution introduced some new language features in the past half a year:

• within... apply... statement
• ranges in array slicing
• features introduced in Q# 0.6 listed in [this blog post](https://devblogs.microsoft.com/qsharp/qsharp-06-language-fea

If you have a state tensor defined over qutrits, and you call cirq.apply_unitary targeting this state tensor but give it a qubit gate, apply_unitary will operate on the 01 subspace. This isn't currently documented but it should be mentioned in the docstring.

The notebook says:

You can either call print() on the circuit, or call the draw() method on the object. This will render a ASCII art version of the circuit diagram. [snip] There are two alternative output renderers for the quantum circuit. One uses matplotlib, and the other uses LaTeX, which leverages the qcircuit package. These can be specified by using mpl and latex values for the out

This is a Documentation improvement:

In the documentation file:
https://github.com/Qiskit/qiskit/blob/master/docs/install.rst

Should be more specific and describe where Qiskit qiskitrc is stored. Example in Unix systems is under ~/qiskit/qiskitrc

#1123 added support for engagement and an encrypted connection with the QPU. While this will be transparent to most users, we should add documentation for power users and to aid in troubleshooting.

Plane waves are periodic basis functions. If one tries to use them to simulate systems of reduced periodicity (i.e. periodic in two-dimensions like graphene, one-dimension like a polymer, or zero-dimensions like a single-molecule in vacuum) then the basis introduces errors from the system interacting with a spurious periodic image that shouldn't be there. In Appendix E, Section 2 of [Phys. Rev. X

Running travis lint gives a bunch of warning. Like for instance, sudo : required is no longer needed, and Travis migrated to a new architecture. So the travis.yml file needs to be updated.

https://blog.travis-ci.com/2018-10-04-combining-linux-infrastructures

I'd love to contribute to having the docs translated to Spanish. Anybody else who'd like to contribute is welcome to join, of course.

As you can see in this gif, the descriptions of the parameterized gates on the right half are too small and not really visible. This looks like a bug. Could this be corrected? Thanks!

Currently if a user wants to determine if a particular operation is supported on a device from the documentation (e.g., in the default.qubit plugin), they will find a bunch of gates/operations/observables listed, but under different names than found in PennyLane. This may be confusing to users. We should state very clearly

README.md says (example "Pure python quantum computing machinery"):

qc.measure("q1")
qc.measure("q2")
Probability.pretty_print_probabilities(qc.qubits.get_quantum_register_containing("q1").get_state())

If you do so, the last line always output:

|psi>=|00>
Pr(|00>)=1.000000; 
<state>=1.000000

Because measurement destroyed the state. IMHO, it should be get_noop in

QISKit uses inverse trigonometric functions internally and the resulting QASM includes them. See:
https://github.com/lbello/qiskit-sdk-py/commit/8b6ce2b979dd6cb5ab714e6aae70397323d285ee#diff-d975dd8e31d73eac04b5c6d76ebd89fc

They are not explicitly forbidden in the specification, but they are not part of the grammar. Probably just make sense to add them.

Issue description

The function sf.apps.similarity.orbit_cardinality does not work, when the second argument (i.e. 'modes') is larger than 170. The issue happens because of the function scipy.special.factorial, which, in the way it is used, calculates factorials only up to (i

Implement a function to splice parsed-program objects together in a reasonable way.

It looks like the upcoming sbcl 2.0.1 release includes changes to move certain symbols out of cl:*features* and into sb-impl:+internal-features+ [[1]]. IIUC, any "non-public" features will continue to work (for now), but issue a warning [[2]].

I haven't tested it, but it looks like we use at least one such soon-to-be-deprecated feature, namely avx2. We should figure out what to do about

Now, there's no unit test.