Skip to content

Update xeus-cpp to CppInterOp 1.8.0#436

Merged
mcbarton merged 1 commit intocompiler-research:mainfrom
mcbarton:Prepare-for-next-CppInterOp-release
Jan 29, 2026
Merged

Update xeus-cpp to CppInterOp 1.8.0#436
mcbarton merged 1 commit intocompiler-research:mainfrom
mcbarton:Prepare-for-next-CppInterOp-release

Conversation

@mcbarton
Copy link
Collaborator

@mcbarton mcbarton commented Jan 26, 2026

This PR gets xeus-cpp ready for the impending release of CppInterOp.

Fixes #186

@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Jan 29, 2026

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 81.25%. Comparing base (c357fd6) to head (17d0a62).

Additional details and impacted files

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #436      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   81.96%   81.25%   -0.72%     
==========================================
  Files          21       21              
  Lines         959      864      -95     
  Branches       87       78       -9     
==========================================
- Hits          786      702      -84     
+ Misses        173      162      -11     
Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
src/xinspect.cpp 94.11% <ø> (+0.08%) ⬆️

... and 14 files with indirect coverage changes

Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
src/xinspect.cpp 94.11% <ø> (+0.08%) ⬆️

... and 14 files with indirect coverage changes

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
  • 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

Copy link
Contributor

@github-actions github-actions bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

clang-tidy made some suggestions

Copy link
Contributor

@vgvassilev vgvassilev left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Lgtm!

Copy link
Collaborator

@anutosh491 anutosh491 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Please wait for sometime. I need to find the time to verify the cppinterop build on emscripten-forge !

@mcbarton mcbarton force-pushed the Prepare-for-next-CppInterOp-release branch from 06c0404 to f4b789a Compare January 29, 2026 11:55
@anutosh491
Copy link
Collaborator

#436 (review)

See the build was wrong, using llvm 20.1.8 instead of 21.1.8 (https://github.com/emscripten-forge/recipes/actions/runs/21440156682/job/61740836429#step:7:117)

Let's fix this !

@vgvassilev
Copy link
Contributor

vgvassilev commented Jan 29, 2026

#436 (review)

See the build was wrong, using llvm 20.1.8 instead of 21.1.8 (https://github.com/emscripten-forge/recipes/actions/runs/21440156682/job/61740836429#step:7:117)

Let's fix this !

conda-forge/cppinterop-feedstock#27 ? But is that blocking this PR?

@mcbarton
Copy link
Collaborator Author

#436 (review)

See the build was wrong, using llvm 20.1.8 instead of 21.1.8 (https://github.com/emscripten-forge/recipes/actions/runs/21440156682/job/61740836429#step:7:117)

Let's fix this !

This is because the Emscripten forge bot which updated the CppInterOp version didn't update the llvm version (see https://github.com/emscripten-forge/recipes/pull/4332/changes ). We need the llvm version updated like the PR I had opened here https://github.com/emscripten-forge/recipes/pull/4332/changes (but opened in a fresh PR) , but this must come after your resource headers PR is in https://github.com/emscripten-forge/recipes/pull/4332/changes.

@mcbarton
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@vgvassilev conda-forge/cppinterop-feedstock#27 updates everything in the cppinterop feedstock to llvm 21 (things which should have gone in the PR which updated to version 1.8.0) . I suspect none of the changes in it effect the ci passing, but its best it goes in.

@anutosh491
Copy link
Collaborator

See the build was wrong, using llvm 20.1.8 instead of 21.1.8

5 mins more and we should have a fixed cppinterop build on emscripten-forge (the build number should be 1 cause 0 by the bot wasn't correct !)

@mcbarton mcbarton force-pushed the Prepare-for-next-CppInterOp-release branch from fed9b61 to 17d0a62 Compare January 29, 2026 12:59
Copy link
Collaborator

@anutosh491 anutosh491 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I tried understanding the unpinning on the cxx-compiler. As far as I remember that wasn't something that just work right off the box. But if it does #186 can now be closed !

Curious if this started working too compiler-research/CppInterOp#422

I'll get back to this later if it deserves any attention ! Rest everything looks OK

@anutosh491
Copy link
Collaborator

I guess we wait for the cppinterop build after the feedstock merge to be ready -> then rerun the jobs here and then merge ?!

@mcbarton
Copy link
Collaborator Author

The new conda-forge package is being used by the ci (see https://github.com/compiler-research/xeus-cpp/pull/436/checks#step:3:103 for an example showing this). The ci has passed. Merging.

@mcbarton mcbarton merged commit 82532a3 into compiler-research:main Jan 29, 2026
41 checks passed
@anutosh491
Copy link
Collaborator

I was waiting for your fix on the feedstock "the llvm 21 fix" to land and then we could have had a build against that in the CI and then merged. But ig its fine

@mcbarton
Copy link
Collaborator Author

I was waiting for your fix on the feedstock "the llvm 21 fix" to land and then we could have had a build against that in the CI and then merged. But ig its fine

The ci did build against that feedstock package you mention. That is what I was pointing to when I gave the link https://github.com/compiler-research/xeus-cpp/pull/436/checks#step:3:103

- nlohmann_json
- nlohmann_json-abi
- CppInterOp
- CppInterOp>1.7.0
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

In don't understand the strict upper bound on 1.7.0.

Shouldn't it be a non-strict on 1.8?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Regarding pinning cxx-compiler to version 1.7

5 participants