Josh Izaac

Copying a potential solution from external conversation for archival properties: > For a while, since we've refactored the interfaces/QNode, I've had at the back of my mind an idea on...

I realize something else; if we add `tape.interface`, which is smartly determined by the tape parameters, we no longer require users to pass `interface=` to the QNode, we should be...

in the past we have tried both: - having `trainable_params` be `None` by default - having the tape 'know' its interface, so that it can set trainable parameters the correct...

@DSGuala just to clarify, is this PR complete or did you still have changes you want to make? Because if it is complete, we could merge during feature freeze next...

Hi @yulunwang! This is a great feature request. Perhaps we could add something like the following: ```python obs = [qml.PauliX(0), qml.PauliZ(1), qml.PauliX(0) @ qml.PauliX(1)] H = lambda t: qml.Hamiltonian([2 *...

Have we implemented 2nd order adjoint anywhere? Or is requiring this implementation the biggest blocker?

Closing this issue for now, since it is less of a bug, and more of a new feature we need to develop (adjoint differentiation + second order derivatives)

@paul0403 just checking that this should still be open?

@maliasadi did a need for `Projector` show up due to a particular feature/workflow you are trying to get running?

Hi @ankit27kh, unfortunately this is an known error when drawing QNodes with Catalyst mid-circuit measurements, and something we are working to fix! In the meantime, swapping to the PennyLane mid-circuit...