Refactor cirq - squin emit and lowering

[david-pl]

Closes #497

I had to cut down support for some cirq features in lowering, but I don't think they were used heavily. For example, we no longer have CZPowGate with arbitrary exponents or arbitrary controlled operations.

Also, one more significant breaking change is that func.Invoke statements are no longer emitted as CircuitOperation, but are added to the circuit flat-out. I think this matches user expectations and otherwise would have been really odd given our new approach with stdlib functions.

Finally, noise still needs to be done, but that is pending #495, which should be merged first, I think.

Edit: Noise is also done now, but I also had to cut support for AmplitudeDampingChannel, since we can't really represent this with the current statements in the noise dialect (I think). However, I haven't seen this used anywhere so far, so I'd suggest we wait for someone to actually require that feature.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 91.20000% with 22 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
src/bloqade/cirq_utils/lowering.py	91.89%	12 Missing ⚠️
src/bloqade/cirq_utils/emit/noise.py	77.77%	6 Missing ⚠️
src/bloqade/cirq_utils/emit/base.py	80.00%	3 Missing ⚠️
src/bloqade/cirq_utils/emit/clifford.py	98.24%	1 Missing ⚠️

📢 Thoughts on this report? Let us know!

[github-actions]

☂️ Python Coverage

current status: ✅

Overall Coverage

Lines	Covered	Coverage	Threshold	Status
11111	9251	83%	0%	🟢

New Files

File	Coverage	Status
src/bloqade/cirq_utils/emit/clifford.py	98%	🟢
TOTAL	98%	🟢

Modified Files

File	Coverage	Status
src/bloqade/cirq_utils/emit/init.py	100%	🟢
src/bloqade/cirq_utils/emit/base.py	93%	🟢
src/bloqade/cirq_utils/emit/noise.py	83%	🟢
src/bloqade/cirq_utils/emit/qubit.py	88%	🟢
src/bloqade/cirq_utils/lowering.py	93%	🟢
TOTAL	91%	🟢

updated for commit: 6ba3ccf by action🐍

[weinbe58]

@Roger-luo @david-pl This PR has to go before #518 because qubit.new touches a alot of the code base including cirq lowering.

[weinbe58]

LGTM, @Roger-luo, I know we had discussed doc-strings on the new API, but here all the visitor methods and interpreter methods are not Private. Should we mark the classes as private in this case?

[david-pl]

@weinbe58 @Roger-luo I went ahead and marked the method tables as private, since there's really no point in having those public. I'm not so sure about the target classes themselves though, so let me know how to proceed here.

I'll still go ahead and merge so as to not block other progress in the refactor. We can still change this during the refactor to make it private or add docstrings.