Framework update

[DeborahVolpe]

Framework update for the quantum week presentation

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 57.66423% with 116 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 54.2%. Comparing base (9b45b8d) to head (4803988).
Report is 26 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
src/mqt/qao/solvers.py	57.6%	116 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##            main     #26     +/-   ##
=======================================
+ Coverage   53.1%   54.2%   +1.0%     
=======================================
  Files          6       6             
  Lines       2815    3033    +218     
=======================================
+ Hits        1496    1644    +148     
- Misses      1319    1389     +70     

Flag	Coverage Δ
python	54.2% <57.6%> (+1.0%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

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

[burgholzer]

Just did a quick round of fixes and updated some things. See the individual commits for details.
Overall, this should be good to go.
You might want to also add your new QCE publication to the docs/refs.bib and cite it in the documentation.

One thing i noticed is that the solvers.py file contains huge amounts of code duplication and is probably 5x longer than it needs to be. However, this is nothing to be changed in this PR, but maybe something to keep in mind for a potential future refactor.

[DeborahVolpe]

Just did a quick round of fixes and updated some things. See the individual commits for details. Overall, this should be good to go. You might want to also add your new QCE publication to the docs/refs.bib and cite it in the documentation.
Thank you so much. I have also added the reference here. I have forgotten this point

One thing i noticed is that the solvers.py file contains huge amounts of code duplication and is probably 5x longer than it needs to be. However, this is nothing to be changed in this PR, but maybe something to keep in mind for a potential future refactor.

Yes, thank you.