Jump to content

Talk:Quantum programming

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Woottonjames (talk | contribs) at 08:20, 21 September 2018 (Add to 'Instruction sets vs languages vs frameworks (libraries)' thread). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
WikiProject iconComputing Start‑class Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconComputer science Start‑class Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Computer science, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Computer science related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Things you can help WikiProject Computer science with:

This page should be removed and merged into "Quantum Programming languages" - e.g. replace the page with a forward? --Thorsten 20:11, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]


I think the other way around might be better. Firstly, as there is more than one language and the page you refer to is currently Quantum programming language, and secondly as it would follow the same pattern as functional programming. Maybe each section of the other should be editied and moved into this one, and at the end a redirect set up.
Any comments?--128.243.220.41 10:48, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result was Made moot by deletion of Quantum virtual machine as expired PROD -- TJRC (talk) 02:43, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest we merge Quantum virtual machine with this article. QVM doesn't seem important enough to have a separate article. --Robin (talk) 22:12, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure Quantum virtual machine is important enough to have an article at all. The current article is a 2-sentence stub that states the obvious. I don't think Quantum virtual machines thematically fit well with quantum programming languages, because the latter are about programming an actual (if hypothetical) quantum computer, and not about doing simulations. Selinger (talk) 06:34, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Error?

I am only a lay person, but it seems that in the example where the person dumps a quantum state there should be 16 states listed and maybe the output got cut off? --Craig Pemberton 08:20, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Quantum lambda calculi extensions?

"Quantum lambda calculi are extensions of the lambda calculus, introduced by Alonzo Church and Stephen Cole Kleene in the 1930s.[...]

The first attempt to define a quantum lambda calculus was made by Philip Maymin in 1996."

I'm confused about what it means by it being introduced in the 1930s given that the first attempt to define it was in 1996? 91.125.244.198 (talk) 16:25, 15 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Quantum programming. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:49, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Article title

It might be better to rename the article "quantum programming languages", since the article is really about quantum programming languages or quantum instruction sets, as opposed to the abstract concept of programming a quantum computer. See, for example, computer programming vs programming language. --Robin (talk) 23:20, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Instruction sets vs languages vs frameworks (libraries)

I think the addition of a separate category for "frameworks" (or libararies) would help clarify this. For example Cirq is not really an instruction set, and PyQuil, which is not mentioned is also a python framework (think Tensorflow) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dabacon (talkcontribs) 19:15, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Dabacon:I made an edit the other day, creating the 'Software development kits' section, but I hadn't read your comment before doing it. I think it might have addressed your concerns, but let me know what you think. Woottonjames (talk) 08:20, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]