RFC: Move away from NonDestructiveMeasure in squin.wire dialect name #304
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅ 📢 Thoughts on this report? Let us know! |
☂️ Python Coverage
Overall Coverage
New FilesNo new covered files... Modified Files
|
weinbe58
approved these changes
Jun 9, 2025
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
On the heels of @weinbe58 's request and input from @cduck this PR just proposes moving away from the old NonDestructiveMeasure name (which caused some confusion over what exactly was being "destroyed") and opting for something a bit clearer.
I remember there weren't any objections to something along the lines of "Loss Resolving Readout" so I propose Loss Resolving "Measure" but perhaps there might be some objections or other ideas. I don't know if it would be helpful either to "flip" the intent behind the measures (potential via renaming the default Measure) considering @cduck has mentioned Loss Resolution is the more common, normal mode of operation as opposed to the destructive/"lossy" form.