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
Update documentation setup configuration #99
Update documentation setup configuration #99
Conversation
Why do we need llvm 10? CppInterOp will require some work to enable llvm 10 if possible at all. |
The readthedocs supports llvm-version only till llvm-10 and also prior cmake versions.So I had to use these versions for readthedocs compatibility. |
Do we really need to build the codebase with llvm-10? I think if we specified the doxygen build flag we should probably ignore the llvm version checks as we could be only building the doxygen config. |
Where can we see this llvm-10 support? I don't immediately find it
… On Jun 29, 2023, at 11:02 AM, Krishna Narayanan ***@***.***> wrote:
Why do we need llvm 10? CppInterOp will require some work to enable llvm 10 if possible at all.
The readthedocs supports llvm-version only till llvm-10 and also prior cmake versions.So I had to use these versions for readthedocs compatibilty.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message ID: ***@***.***>
|
We just need llvm to pass the cmake checks, it is nothing to do with docs generation. I will try to get some alter method for this |
whose cmake checks? |
ok, I see your graphic now.. |
did you consider using conda to do the installs instead? |
@vgvassilev @davidlange6 If I understand correctly, the pull request is not actually building CppInterOp in the readthedocs configuration.
Yes, this can be done. For this, we will have to add an option such as,
CppInterOp is not being built / installed. Only documentation is being built. |
CMakeLists.txt
Outdated
if (NOT LLVM_FOUND AND DEFINED LLVM_DIR) | ||
find_package(LLVM REQUIRED CONFIG ${llvm_search_hints} NO_DEFAULT_PATH) | ||
endif() | ||
# if (NOT LLVM_FOUND AND DEFINED LLVM_DIR) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think this change can be reverted now.
CMakeLists.txt
Outdated
if (NOT Clang_FOUND AND DEFINED Clang_DIR) | ||
find_package(Clang REQUIRED CONFIG ${clang_extra_hints} NO_DEFAULT_PATH) | ||
endif() | ||
# if (NOT Clang_FOUND AND DEFINED Clang_DIR) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This can be reverted as well.
Yes, but that change would make it look like we support llvm-10 which we do not. So users with llvm-10 might trigger a build which would then fail. That’s what I am trying to avoid here. The best would be to install the right llvm in the container. The second best would be to use a special cmake flag. |
Oh, yes you are right.
Yes, this seems right. @Krishna-13-cyber can you please add the special CMake flag for this if we cannot install |
Yes, I will get it done! |
"llvm-10 is only required to run CMake on the CppInterOp." - this doesn't make much sense to me. Whose limitation is this? |
Apparently that's what's in the default container of the readthedocs infrastructure. So that limitation comes from there and I am not even convinced if that's a limitation per se. What we should not do is change our cmake files to seem that we support llvm-10 as that'd be incorrect. |
ok, I guess this is because build.image is basically obsolete. I'd suggest we follow build.os instead.. |
I have used this approach and works perfect. Thanks! |
Can you configure your editor to remove trailing white space? |
Yes, I will do this but I don't see any trailing spaces here in this PR! |
docs/conf.py
Outdated
|
||
INTEROP_ROOT = '..' | ||
html_theme_options = { | ||
"github_user": "vgvassilev", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We should probably use compiler-research.
09e61b7
to
94d1c7f
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM!
e087953
No description provided.