> > As Daniel mentioned, for Ramsey experiments when you're scanning the > > delay, when the delay is 0 you'd have two back to back pi/2 pulses. > > How would that need to be coded differently? Explicitly, > > > > ttl.pulse(t_pi/2) > > delay(t) > > ttl.pulse(t_pi/2) > > > > and we scan t from 0 onwards. > > ttl.on() > delay(t_pi/2) > ttl.pulse_off(t) > delay(t_pi/2) > ttl.off() > > would be a natural extension of the API.
If we're going to talk about "unaesthetic" code, I'd say this version is much worse than the three-line original code. From a logical standpoint, a Ramsey sequence consists of two rotations with a variable delay between them. While this 5-line code manages to create the desired sequence, it loses the logical flow that one has from reading code like the 3-line version -- much harder to tell from inspection that this is a Ramsey sequence. Is there another way to maintain or wrap the two back-to-back pulses so that you can accomplish your goals for DRTIO/DMA while not hurting the lexical clarity of the code on the physics level? Best, Daniel _______________________________________________ ARTIQ mailing list https://ssl.serverraum.org/lists/listinfo/artiq
