Cirq Deprecate Engine.run and friends?

@dstrain115 : what's the plan with all the methods on Engine that aren't in AbstractEngine? I think we should deprecate them and/or modify them to delegate to EngineProcessor methods.

Jun 13 '22 22:06 mpharrigan

I am not sure about this. There's a bunch of non-standard features, like sending to multiple processors or sending programs without jobs, etc that I am reluctant to get rid of. On the other hand, it's not great to have a bunch of methods that are not in the abstract interface.

Bringing in @wcourtney to weigh in.

Jun 17 '22 20:06 dstrain115

@wcourtney what do you think?

Jun 27 '22 16:06 mpharrigan

bump @wcourtney

Jul 06 '22 21:07 mpharrigan

@wcourtney what do you think?

Jul 11 '22 23:07 mpharrigan

sending to multiple processors or sending programs without jobs

2¢: As I understand it, both of these features are confusing to users. IMO, it's a user win to clean up these legacy features even if it's a bit of work to bring them back. If that happens, I expect that we'll have new requirements for the features and a new model and if there was churn in the meantime, we can skip all intermediate the migration work :-).

Jul 12 '22 00:07 wcourtney

These were removed in the interface and only persist in the implementation.

Also, this is now a duplicate of https://github.com/quantumlib/Cirq/issues/6271

Mar 21 '24 23:03 dstrain115