Notebook for adding input layers and operators

[lkct]

As per title.

Also some minor changes:

• Fixes to #272.
• Introduces Layer._make_param to reduce duplicate code.

[codecov[bot]]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 82.35294% with 3 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Please upload report for BASE (main@1d4f8f3). Learn more about missing BASE report.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
cirkit/symbolic/layers.py	80.00%	1 Missing and 1 partial :warning:
cirkit/symbolic/parameters.py	66.66%	1 Missing :warning:

Additional details and impacted files

```diff @@ Coverage Diff @@ ## main #275 +/- ## ======================================= Coverage ? 71.24% ======================================= Files ? 45 Lines ? 4782 Branches ? 708 ======================================= Hits ? 3407 Misses ? 1176 Partials ? 199 ```

:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[loreloc]

Thanks a lot!

I think the how-to-add-an-operator notebook has lower priority and does not need to be merged soon, so I just have some suggestions for the how-add-a-layer notebook:

• Do we need to write how to add an operator over layers too? I think this deserves a separate notebook. At this stage, it is sufficient to simply show how to add a new layer, i.e., symbolic + PyTorch implementation.
• For registering the compilation rules, I think it is better to show the usage of the PipelineContext rather than updating the global rule dictionary. See add_layer_compilation_rule method https://github.com/april-tools/cirkit/blob/poly_diff_notebook/cirkit/pipeline.py#L64-L65 .

[lkct]

Do we need to write how to add an operator over layers too?

I would say yes, because it's also important to make full use of cirkit. But they indeed face different levels of users.

I think this deserves a separate notebook.

I agree. There're some duplicates in the two notebooks, and we may do it in three: add-layer, layer-op, and circuit-op.

See add_layer_compilation_rule method

Thanks for pointing out. This will be better for end-users.

[arranger1044]

@lkct what's the status on this?

[lkct]

@lkct what's the status on this?

I will finalize it. I have to rearrange the sections and catch up with the API changes.