Hayk Sargsyan

See also https://github.com/qiboteam/qibolab/pull/852

Yeah, just to be clear, with this issue I am not implying or suggesting that one approach is better that the other. It may be a question worthwhile investigating, but...

@stavros11 @Jacfomg @andrea-pasquale I think this issue should wait until `qibolab 0.2` is ready. In `0.2` we are aiming for a structure of `qibolab` with clearly defined layers (e.g. see...

> Examples about how to write platforms I would probably want to do this as separate PR. > Drop `pulse.qubit` and `pulse.channel` This PR. > Then there is a debate...

Should be just `list`. I believe `List` is a remnant of older versions of python, where `list` could not be used for type annotation.

Hi @aorgazf, thanks for making the effort to report the issues. With @andrea-pasquale we skimmed through the reports with the aim of identifying concrete action points. It is a bit...

This looks like pretty much independent from the refactor, so I would rather do it separately, not to clog the refactor PR too much.

Investigation reveals that this issue is not related to the instrument waiting forever for unused sequencers to sync. The issue is in the communication of the driver with the instrument....

Short status update: I have now narrowed this issue down to a small self-contained reproducible case. There is also confirmation that the issue can be successfully reproduced on other instrument...

Until the issue is fixed, the most reliable thing to do to avoid it is not use more than 4 sequencers of the readout module simultaneously. From the perspective of...