Should we have tutorial/guidelines for integrating Beman libraries into Compiler Explorer?

Should we have tutorial/guidelines for integrating Beman libraries into Compiler Explorer? A Beman standard recommendation or best practices?

Currently we have optional26 integration into CE. Integrate Beman.Optional26 into Compiler Explorer · Issue #21 · beman-project/optional26 · GitHub, which is header-only (easier to deploy); daily basis deployment.

If we want this, we need a versioning flow. My understanding is that we can ship 2 types of library versions: trunk (latest main) and named version (e.g., 1.0.1). I don’t remember if we have a decision for versioning.

Yes! As someone trying to get familiar with beman projects, having a playground with the projects without having to clone & build would be fantastic!

I think the sync meeting from last week mentioned we use semantic versioning?

I don’t think we’ve cut enough releases to really make a decision? But I’m fine with semantic versioning.
We probably need to discuss what sort of changes we mean? In particular I’m about to make some changes to constructor overload set resolution, is that a major version, or are we still at version 0?
There’s likely to be name change breaks as a proposal makes its way through the process. Should we hold a 0.x until it lands, or track changes?
What about when I restart work on rvalue reference support, which will be after lvalue ref lands?

I believe there’s a standard way to list into Compiler Explorer once a library is published to ConanCenter. If I recall correctly, they do a conan install and then point at the installed headers.

They do not have full link support as a rule unless you really hack things up. Some of us are working on the CPS specification exactly to make this sort of thing more regular and supported.

This is a good idea. Something on my backburner is to create a “Beman Contributors Guide” which would be a perfect place for this kind of info. Create "Beman Contributors' Guide" · Issue #45 · beman-project/beman · GitHub

Regarding semantic versioning, we haven’t had a decision on this yet so a proposal here would be great.