Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Create guidelines for integration Beman libraries into Compiler Explorer #70

Open
4 tasks
neatudarius opened this issue Nov 27, 2024 · 3 comments
Open
4 tasks
Assignees

Comments

@neatudarius
Copy link
Member

Create guidelines for integration Beman libraries into Compiler Explorer

  • Add actual guidelines
    • Header-only library
    • Library with actual binaries
  • Examples with beman.optional26 and beman.iterator_interface
@neatudarius
Copy link
Member Author

Related to naming conventions, the Beman Standard uses beman.<short_name, which is kept.

But inside the CE config, we need to be aware of CE internal renaming. At Beman weekly seek we decided to incorporate such guidelines into one Beman docs:

When integrating into Compiler Explorer, any beman.<short_name> Beman library name should be converted to beman_<short_name> for filling in the keys in YAML/configs inside the Compiler Explorer infrastructure (no actual change inside the Beman org). The display name from CE UI can be still set to beman.<short_name>, via libs.beman_.name = beman.<short_name>.

@wusatosi
Copy link
Member

Is there a chance that we will consider hosting our own version of compiler explorer?

I can see a lot of benefit with this, e.g. we can see codegen of a library based on main/ when a full release is not ready yet.

Many features may dependent on forks of llvm that implements specific feature, would be eaiser to check on those platforms as well.

@neatudarius
Copy link
Member Author

Is there a chance that we will consider hosting our own version of compiler explorer?

I can see a lot of benefit with this, e.g. we can see codegen of a library based on main/ when a full release is not ready yet.

Many features may dependent on forks of llvm that implements specific feature, would be eaiser to check on those platforms as well.

I don't think custom infrastructure is something we want to prioritize in the next months for components which are good enough. At this point, I would concentrate our efforts for 1) guidelines to integrate into CE and 2) actually integrate all Beman libraries in CE.

I think your suggestion is for a long term approach.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants