Conversation
rassouly
force-pushed
the
run_awg
branch
4 times, most recently
from
92df82f to
c757fea
Compare
|
This should be cleaned up. Some of the changes don't really make sense but they will in later PRs. |
|
Which PR related to the AWG should I review first @rassouly ? |
You should review this one first |
rassouly
force-pushed
the
run_awg
branch
5 times, most recently
from
7d91d1e to
9bc6257
Compare
|
I finally have access to an AWG so I've restarted working on cleaning up the AWG changes. I still don't know whether I should add the new tasks in exopy_hqc_legacy (like we have currenly on our branch) or in exopy_pulses. |
|
Only generic tasks should go in pulses. I can have another look if you want. What task should I look at ? |
I was talking about the TransferAWGFileTask (PR #57). The PR needs some work before you can review it though (it needs to be rebased on this patch and properly tested). Since it's only applicable to the Tektro, I guess it can stay here in exopy_hqc_legacy. |
|
This has now been tested on real hardware. |
|
In that case yes let's keep it here. Should I review now ? |
|
Yes, you can review this PR now. |
|
I hadn't realize that the ask_for_values function was already deprecated. There are more than 200 uses of this function in this plugin alone. Should we replace them all now? |
|
Unicode to Str is trivial yes. The ask_for_values is tricker we should at least stop using it in new code. And if you can clean up the instrument you have access to that would be great. |
|
This is ready to be merged I think. |
| return self._driver.read_values(format) | ||
|
|
||
| def ask(self, message): | ||
| def ask(self, message, *args, **kwargs): |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why *args and **kwargs, query only has delay ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Future proofing I guess. I'd like this method to behave exactly like in the pyvisa docs. If you think we should control which arguments can be forwarded to pyvisa, I'll change it.
… acquisition cards The code is a slightly modified version of the code written by Raphaël and Zaki.
This is needed because we are working with a raw bytes array
|
This has been rebased on main, @MatthieuDartiailh, could you take a look at it now? |
|
Will do my best to review before next Wednesday. |
MatthieuDartiailh
left a comment
MatthieuDartiailh
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| am not really familiar with that part of the code. Looks fine apart from a missing comment. A review by Zaki or somebody using that code would be best.
|
Could we get this merged now and ask for Zaki's review later? The Tektro is almost unusable on master so I doubt any tektro user is using master. They are all using code from other branches that has been cleaned up and is included in this PR. |
|
Let me ping people once just in case. I will merge by the end of the week in the absence of any comment. @leghtas @mvillius @rlescanne please review if you can since this affects you. |
|
I have never used the AWG so as far as I am concerned I am fine with all these changes. Raph and Alice&Bob people are mostly using the QM I think, which leaves only Clarke with the AWG, but we will be fine with all this |
|
Thanks @mvillius |
3 participants
The code is a slightly modified version of the code written by Raphaël and Zaki. It changes the way the AWG is operated: from on/off to events. The sequences are usually built such that receiving an event starts playing the sequences in order and receiving a second event stops and rearms the AWG.
The code is not fully tested yet but you can start reviewing it.