You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Presumably, this is to improve performance of solvers such as timeevolution.master. However, this feels excessive if we don't want to use the corresponding solver, and instead create an ODE problem directly with our density operators and dmaster_h!. For example, it would be great if we could define an in-place method without the cache input, say
This is a natural interface that I'm aiming for with all of the recent broadcasting work (#404, qojulia/QuantumOpticsBase.jl#172). Do the QO maintainers have any comments or oppositions to defining such a method in QO.jl?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
@Krastanov to build off our discussion in person: a workaround is assigning the cached drho to the p parameter of the ODEProblem object, which prevents us from caching at each time step if we use OrdinaryDiffEq.jl directly. So we don't have to define any new methods. For example, using dmaster_h! which is already a part of the public API, we have
In several of the master functions, e.g.,
dmaster_h!
, a cached copy ofdrho
is required as input:Presumably, this is to improve performance of solvers such as
timeevolution.master
. However, this feels excessive if we don't want to use the corresponding solver, and instead create an ODE problem directly with our density operators anddmaster_h!
. For example, it would be great if we could define an in-place method without the cache input, sayThis is a natural interface that I'm aiming for with all of the recent broadcasting work (#404, qojulia/QuantumOpticsBase.jl#172). Do the QO maintainers have any comments or oppositions to defining such a method in QO.jl?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: