Skip to content

Tidy strange code in jit.py #2135

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

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Tidy strange code in jit.py #2135

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
4 changes: 1 addition & 3 deletions frontend/catalyst/jit.py
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -743,9 +743,7 @@ def closure(qnode, *args, **kwargs):
params["_out_tree_expected"] = []
params["_classical_return_indices"] = []
params["_num_mcm_expected"] = []
default_pass_pipeline = self.compile_options.circuit_transform_pipeline
pass_pipeline = params.get("pass_pipeline", default_pass_pipeline)
params["pass_pipeline"] = pass_pipeline
params["pass_pipeline"] = self.compile_options.circuit_transform_pipeline
Copy link
Contributor

@dime10 dime10 Oct 21, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is this worth trying out then?

Suggested change
params["pass_pipeline"] = self.compile_options.circuit_transform_pipeline
default_pass_pipeline = self.compile_options.circuit_transform_pipeline
pass_pipeline = kwargs.pop("pass_pipeline", default_pass_pipeline)
params["pass_pipeline"] = pass_pipeline

Copy link
Contributor Author

@albi3ro albi3ro Oct 22, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

So how would we hit that?

Also, seems like that might be a new feature we would have to document and test.

Copy link
Contributor

@dime10 dime10 Oct 22, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Didn't you say PassPipelineWrapper is generating the pass_pipeline kwarg? There is also evidence that we expect a pass_pipeline kwarg in qnodes here and here.

I'm not sure I see a new feature, just obviously buggy code that very likely doesn't match the intent of the author who wrote it. Maybe you're thinking of a new feature because this kwarg could be provided by users as well? But to me it looks like the kwarg is used an internal "secret" parameter rather than a user facing one.

params["debug_info"] = dbg

return QFunc.__call__(
Expand Down