Zy/reed muller

[nzy1997]

Classical, recursive and quantum Reed Muller code. Julia codes come from QuantumClifford.jl with slight changes.

Clecklist:

• The code is properly formatted and commented.
• Substantial new functionality is documented within the docs.
• All new functionality is tested.
• All of the automated tests on github pass.
• We recently started enforcing formatting checks. If formatting issues are reported in the new code you have written, please correct them. There will be plenty of old code that is flagged as we are slowly transitioning to enforced formatting. Please do not worry about or address older formatting issues -- keep your PR just focused on your planned contribution.

[codecov]

Welcome to Codecov 🎉

Once you merge this PR into your default branch, you're all set! Codecov will compare coverage reports and display results in all future pull requests.

Thanks for integrating Codecov - We've got you covered ☂️

[Krastanov]

We will need to structure this in a way in which it is easy to review.

Before we continue with this specific PR we need to do a bit more fixing of the initial setup. Could you reset this repo to really just be an empty repo without already defined codes? It seems already some things were moved over from other repositories without a review, and more importantly, without a mechanism to track what changes are happening. Given that a lot of code will be moved around we should be careful with how clear the git history of the repo is.

• What parts of this were copied from other repositories? What was then edited separately? Currently the commits do not make this clear. Could you make a single commit for copies at the start of the PR and then separate semantically meaningful commits for edits on top of it. You can use git rebase or git fixup to keep things neat. Avoid git merges.
• How is this going to be kept in sync with QuantumClifford? Most importantly, what is the mechanism to know there is no lost data or anything like that?
• Could you switch to TestItems? That would make it easy to run the tests from vscode directly. And it will make it possible to just copy over tests from Quantum Clifford.
• Could you switch to a test folder with its own Project.toml? That is a cleaner way to structure packages that was introduced sometime round julia 1.0-1.3. In particular, it lets you remove the extras and targets fields, and makes for much neater separation of dependencies in the Project.toml files

It might be useful to discuss this live. If you would like to meet today or tomorrow, you can use my calendar to schedule a meeting: https://cal.com/krastanov/pre-agreed-meeting

[Krastanov]

When I said "empty repo" I was not very clear. I meant more of an "empty package", with all of the scaffolding already in, but no codes or APIs copied over from other packages. Otherwise the process of moving code from other packages here would be very messy and difficult to review. The goal is to have a separation of commits that simply move stuff (and thus do not require serious review and have a very simple diff) and commits that modify stuff (that need an actual review).

[nzy1997]

Thank you for the suggestions. @Krastanov

• I make a new repo QECCore.jl and a simple pull request on the interface along with a simple code. Could you please check them to see if I understand your workflow suggestions correctly?
• Regrading to the mechanism to sync with QuantumClifford, I have scheduled a meeting. We can discuss this carefully.