momchil-flex

Yep, I think the first API option you describe sounds good. Regarding the formula, it should be something related to what we discussed in the adjoint issue. Something like ```...

Who worked on this before? @caseyflex @lucas-flexcompute @tylerflex ? @tomflexcompute it would be good to have an example of the plotting being wrong.

Any follow up on this? What should we do?

How would `sim_data["field_monitor"].plot("Ex")` differ from `sim_data["field_monitor"].Ex.plot()` and `sim_data.plot_field("field_monitor", "Ex")` (assuming the latter is fixed)?

> 5. Important point, since `attrs` are mutable, we want to ensure our internal code doesn't depend on attrs in any way. Otherwise we introduce state. So as a rule,...

> > The way this is currently, identical simulations with different attrs will not go through the caching mechanism, right? I think this may be fine, but I do remember...

Just a note that I think we'd move it out of plugins and into the core components on par with all other solvers.

It's not very clear to me what to do about this. I am not sure if there are situations in which *strictly zero* fields will be injected. Do you have...

Ok, yeah, if we're talking about strictly zero fields then I can add a warning.

@tomflexcompute was looking into this again but it would be nice to have a test case and I'm not sure how to construct one.