TerminalLogicalMeasurement Validation

[johnzl-777]

This is what I think should be sufficient for TerminalLogicalMeasurement Validation.

I enforce the following conditions:

1. A program should only ever have ONE TerminalLogicalMeasurement
2. all spawned qubits should be consumed in that one terminal measurement. There should be no dangling qubits.

There are some additions that come to mind - ranging from immediately relevant to some things that are further out in terms of infrastructure:

• I had to make a separate validation pass as opposed to tacking things onto the current logical validation. I think because of this "logical validation" should be renamed to something a bit more precise.
• AddressAnalysis already counts the number of (unique) qubits spawned but there's no way to access that information directly. It would be nice if there was some way to attach that to the final frame returned at the end of the analysis. Currently I tally up unique qubit ids and compare that against the number of things fed into the terminal measurement

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 94.38202% with 5 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...de/gemini/analysis/measurement_validation/impls.py	88.23%	4 Missing ⚠️
src/bloqade/analysis/measure_id/impls.py	92.85%	1 Missing ⚠️

📢 Thoughts on this report? Let us know!

[github-actions]

☂️ Python Coverage

current status: ✅

Overall Coverage

Lines	Covered	Coverage	Threshold	Status
10477	9216	88%	0%	🟢

New Files

File	Coverage	Status
src/bloqade/gemini/analysis/measurement_validation/init.py	100%	🟢
src/bloqade/gemini/analysis/measurement_validation/analysis.py	100%	🟢
src/bloqade/gemini/analysis/measurement_validation/impls.py	88%	🟢
TOTAL	96%	🟢

Modified Files

File	Coverage	Status
src/bloqade/analysis/measure_id/impls.py	94%	🟢
src/bloqade/gemini/dialects/logical/groups.py	100%	🟢
TOTAL	97%	🟢

updated for commit: dc6ffdd by action🐍

[david-pl]

Looks good, but I'm not sure about some stuff (see comments).

[weinbe58]

overall looks good 🚀 just a few comments to address

[weinbe58]

To fix the circular import put this validation inside logical folder since this is only a logical program validation.

[johnzl-777]

By extension that would also mean that the current logical_validation should also go in there as well? Just as a heads up I'll be splitting up the rules in logical_validation right after this PR (so the scf, gate, and func impls are separate validations you can compose)

[johnzl-777]

Gave it a shot, didn't play nice ): Willing to revisit in a subsequent PR though, that will involve shuffling more things around anyways

[weinbe58]

LGTM