This is true, but at that point, the goal would be to have a higher level language above the quantum gates. And at that point, I'd guess the code is less educational?
That is, at the end of the day, something like Shor's algorithm can be reduced to some math constructs we roughly know. The speedup comes from these only being efficient using quantum gates. Implementing the code using abstract quantum gates isn't to try and compete, but to try and understand the gates and how they work at a logical level.
This is like learning how boolean gates work to understand some ideas of how computers work. The only people that really think in many of those terms are the CPU designers. Teaching the next round of the designers does so by working with boolean models to get there.
And you are correct that we may have other quantum constructs someday. Just like much of what goes into a CPU isn't strictly OR/AND/etc. With the way gates are wired, it can be confusing to folks as the input signal can also be seen as destroyed in the circuit, but a deterministic signal is captured on the other side.
Now, the above is all from my weak intuition here. I would not be shocked to find I'm wrong on parts.
At a higher level, it is "prime_factors(n)", no? The Shor's part could be said as a smaller part, but it is still doing something we have named.
Again, though, these programs are not to write an algorithm in quantum code. These are to understand the building blocks of a quantum computer. Just as a BDD/ZDD can be used to find optimal gate designs of an added built on boolean chains. You first have to understand the boolean chains.
That is, at the end of the day, something like Shor's algorithm can be reduced to some math constructs we roughly know. The speedup comes from these only being efficient using quantum gates. Implementing the code using abstract quantum gates isn't to try and compete, but to try and understand the gates and how they work at a logical level.
This is like learning how boolean gates work to understand some ideas of how computers work. The only people that really think in many of those terms are the CPU designers. Teaching the next round of the designers does so by working with boolean models to get there.
And you are correct that we may have other quantum constructs someday. Just like much of what goes into a CPU isn't strictly OR/AND/etc. With the way gates are wired, it can be confusing to folks as the input signal can also be seen as destroyed in the circuit, but a deterministic signal is captured on the other side.
Now, the above is all from my weak intuition here. I would not be shocked to find I'm wrong on parts.