Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 95.34884% with 2 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 75.23%. Comparing base (6c05eb9) to head (bf2a7a8).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #114      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   75.15%   75.23%   +0.07%     
==========================================
  Files          29       29              
  Lines        1284     1296      +12     
==========================================
+ Hits          965      975      +10     
- Misses        319      321       +2     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@lkdvos this is ready for review. I think it would be nice to merge this soon so then I can make a corresponding PR to GradedArrays.jl using these new customization points to fix ITensor/GradedArrays.jl#29 (though I know you are traveling so may not have time to review, I can make a draft PR to GradedArrays.jl in the meantime).

I think the main considerations are:

1. The names and arguments, I'm definitely open to suggestions.
2. Whether these are the right customization points.

You can see how this interface is used to account for abelian symmetries in ITensor/GradedArrays.jl#33.

I think this looks very clean in general, should be good to go?

Thanks, I think so, the main things I wanted feedback on are the names/interfaces of the new interface functions eachblockaxis, mortar_axis, and similar_output, since those are semi-public and act as the customization points for ITensor/GradedArrays.jl#33. If you're happy with those, I'm happy with those!

I don't think I can come up with anything better than eachblockaxis or mortar_axis. similar_output is a little non-descriptive maybe, and the semi-public state of that is an interesting problem. I don't think this is a major issue though, and I'm fine with keeping the name as is since I also can't come up with better alternatives

That's basically how I feel as well. Since it is semi-public we can always reassess as we go along (we'll have to make a breaking change to change it but it would be very minor since it will only be used by GradedArrays.jl for now).