Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fix tweedledum runtime detection in BooleanExpression.from_dimacs_file (backport #10132) #10137

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 22, 2023

Conversation

mergify[bot]
Copy link
Contributor

@mergify mergify bot commented May 22, 2023

This is an automatic backport of pull request #10132 done by Mergify.


Mergify commands and options

More conditions and actions can be found in the documentation.

You can also trigger Mergify actions by commenting on this pull request:

  • @Mergifyio refresh will re-evaluate the rules
  • @Mergifyio rebase will rebase this PR on its base branch
  • @Mergifyio update will merge the base branch into this PR
  • @Mergifyio backport <destination> will backport this PR on <destination> branch

Additionally, on Mergify dashboard you can:

  • look at your merge queues
  • generate the Mergify configuration with the config editor.

Finally, you can contact us on https://mergify.com

#10132)

This commit fixes an oversight in the 0.24.0 release that caused an
accidental change in the exception raised when attempting to use
BooleanExpression.from_dimacs_file without having tweedledum installed.
In #9754 the detection of tweedledum was updated to avoid import time
detection so that the module can be imported even if tweedledum isn't
installed. This was done through the use of the optionals decorators
so that tweedledum is only attempted to be imported when the
classicalfunction modules is used. However, the decorators don't wrap
classmethod constructors by default and this caused the incorrect
exception type to be raised. This commit fixes this by doing the runtime
checking manually inside the from_dimacs_file constructor.

(cherry picked from commit 9f647c7)
@mergify mergify bot requested a review from a team as a code owner May 22, 2023 08:05
@qiskit-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

Thank you for opening a new pull request.

Before your PR can be merged it will first need to pass continuous integration tests and be reviewed. Sometimes the review process can be slow, so please be patient.

While you're waiting, please feel free to review other open PRs. While only a subset of people are authorized to approve pull requests for merging, everyone is encouraged to review open pull requests. Doing reviews helps reduce the burden on the core team and helps make the project's code better for everyone.

One or more of the the following people are requested to review this:

  • @Qiskit/terra-core

@jakelishman jakelishman added the Changelog: Bugfix Include in the "Fixed" section of the changelog label May 22, 2023
@jakelishman jakelishman added this pull request to the merge queue May 22, 2023
Merged via the queue into stable/0.24 with commit ab40959 May 22, 2023
@mergify mergify bot deleted the mergify/bp/stable/0.24/pr-10132 branch May 22, 2023 12:40
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Changelog: Bugfix Include in the "Fixed" section of the changelog
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants