-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 56
Bump v0.16 + Remove old deprecations #321
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.
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
Conversation
29648b6 to
4e4474c
Compare
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
... and 1 file with indirect coverage changes 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
4e4474c to
b9a86ff
Compare
b9a86ff to
186a375
Compare
|
|
||
| ### Changed | ||
|
|
||
| - Tensors now no longer print their data by default, only their spaces. Use `blocks(t)` or `subblocks(t)` to inspect data ([#304](https://github.com/QuantumKitHub/TensorKit.jl/pull/304)) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I forgot about the status of that. I do think people are not too happy with no output being shown; would it be so bad to shows blocks(t) by default?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Or is this having a lot of repercussions again on MPSKit etc?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We definitely used to show the output of subblocks(t), which we could add back here (even though I strongly prefer blocks(t), I think that is what people wanted?).
I think MPSKit wouldn't be affected since that would have to use the compact = true setting anyways, which shouldn't print this.
If we were to do this, I would however want to limit the output of that by default.
While I agree that for small tensors this can be useful, this is a nuisance for larger tensors...
Do you think this constitutes breaking changes though?
|
After the build completes, the updated documentation will be available here |
|
I tried to further stabilize the tests, but it does seem like playing whack-a-mole with the random number generator again... |
|
Looks good to me, but there is a failing AD test on LTS, so that would preferably be fixed. I am to tired at this point to investigate myself but can do so tomorrow. |
|
I think I kind of ran out of time for this week to work on this, so if you have some time tomorrow, feel free to do so! |
This PR removes the
deprecate.jlfile, which mostly contained factorization code.The goal is to free up these names again, which could then be reused in further updates without breaking changes, if we wish to do so.
There were some older deprecated functions in that file as well, that had been there forever (Some even 2+ years), which I think is fine to also delete.
Finally, I removed the PackageExtensionCompat dependency, since that was used for supporting package extensions in Julia <v1.9, which we no longer support anyways.
(I also bumped the version and took the liberty of adding myself to the author list, if you don't mind)
This would probably best be merged after #291 and #316, and can then be used to register v0.16, for which I'll try to write some release notes/changelog and add this to the PR.