fix(cmake): set C++ standard according to the PyTorch version

[njzjz]

Copied from deepmodeling/abacus-develop#3277 authored by @caic99

Summary by CodeRabbit

• New Features
  • Enhanced compatibility with different Torch versions by dynamically setting the appropriate C++ standard (C++14 or C++17) based on the Torch version.
• Improvements
  • Improved build process with automatic detection and configuration of Torch version dependencies.
  • Enhanced robustness with additional checks and conditional logic for Torch integration.

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The main change involves adding a macro set_if_higher in the CMakeLists.txt file to conditionally set the CMAKE_CXX_STANDARD based on the Torch version. Specifically, if the Torch version is 2.1.0 or higher, the standard is set to 17; for versions 1.5.0 to less than 2.1.0, it is set to 14. Additional logic ensures that the correct Torch version and CXX flags are used.

Changes

File	Summary
source/CMakeLists.txt	Added macro set_if_higher, conditional logic for CMAKE_CXX_STANDARD based on Torch version, Torch version check, string regex match, and associated logic.

Sequence Diagram(s)

sequenceDiagram
    participant User
    participant CMake
    participant Torch
    
    User->>CMake: Runs cmake configuration
    CMake->>Torch: Check Torch version
    Torch-->>CMake: Returns Torch version
    alt Torch version >= 2.1.0
        CMake->>CMake: set_if_higher(CMAKE_CXX_STANDARD 17)
    else Torch version >= 1.5.0
        CMake->>CMake: set_if_higher(CMAKE_CXX_STANDARD 14)
    end
    CMake->>Torch: Find package Torch
    Torch-->>CMake: Returns Torch package details
    CMake->>CMake: string regex match for CXXABI_PT_MATCH
    alt CXXABI_PT_MATCH found
        CMake->>CMake: Execute conditional logic based on CXXABI_PT_MATCH
    end

Loading

---

Recent review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 5c1cd02 and b215b16.

Files selected for processing (1)

• source/CMakeLists.txt (2 hunks)

Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)

• source/CMakeLists.txt

---

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

• Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
  • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>.
  • Generate unit testing code for this file.
  • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
• Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
  • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
• PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai generate interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table.
  • @coderabbitai show all the console.log statements in this repository.
  • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
  • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
  • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (invoked as PR comments)

• @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
• @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
• @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
• @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
• @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
• @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
• @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
• @coderabbitai help to get help.

Additionally, you can add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.

CodeRabbit Configration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

• You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
• Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
• If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

• Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
• Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
• Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 82.83%. Comparing base (37bee25) to head (b215b16).
Report is 109 commits behind head on devel.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##            devel    #3973   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   82.82%   82.83%           
=======================================
  Files         522      522           
  Lines       50867    50867           
  Branches     3015     3015           
=======================================
+ Hits        42133    42135    +2     
  Misses       7794     7794           
+ Partials      940      938    -2     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.