GH-35239: [MATLAB] Report error when building the MATLAB Interface to Arrow in Debug mode on Windows

[ShaiviAgarwal2]

Rationale for this change

The changes aim to identify the build mode (Debug or Release) of MATLAB by checking the MSVC Runtime library it is linked against. If MATLAB is built with a non-debug version, building in Debug mode is disallowed, and an error message is displayed, guiding the user to switch to Release mode.

What changes are included in this PR?

Added a block of code to check the dependencies of the MATLAB executable, specifically looking for references to MSVCP\d+.dll. If such references are found, it indicates a non-debug version of the MSVC Runtime, and an error message is displayed.

Are these changes tested?

Yes, the changes have been manually tested

Are there any user-facing changes?

No, these changes focus on improving the build process for compatibility with MATLAB. Users will not observe any differences in the functionality or usage of the MATLAB Interface to Arrow.

• Closes: [MATLAB] Report error when building the MATLAB Interface to Arrow in Debug mode on Windows #35239

[github-actions]

⚠️ GitHub issue #35239 has been automatically assigned in GitHub to PR creator.

[ShaiviAgarwal2]

@kou Could you please tell me how to clear Dev / Lint C++, Python, R, Docker, RAT (pull_request) this check !!

[kou]

archery lint --cmake-format --fix will fix it.
See also: https://arrow.apache.org/docs/developers/cpp/development.html#code-style-linting-and-ci

[kevingurney]

Thanks for the PR @ShaiviAgarwal2!

I agree with @kou's comment that this should only require checking the CMAKE_BUILD_TYPE and should not require looking at the dependencies of Matlab_MAIN_PROGRAM.

[kevingurney]

@ShaiviAgarwal2 it looks like the MATLAB Windows CI workflow is failing: https://github.com/apache/arrow/actions/runs/7627307276/job/20775886597?pr=39595#step:9:35.

The error message you added is being triggered right now in CI which may suggest that the logic for checking if the build mode is Debug may need to be modified.

[ShaiviAgarwal2]

@ShaiviAgarwal2 it looks like the MATLAB Windows CI workflow is failing: https://github.com/apache/arrow/actions/runs/7627307276/job/20775886597?pr=39595#step:9:35.

The error message you added is being triggered right now in CI which may suggest that the logic for checking if the build mode is Debug may need to be modified.

I tried solving the error but wasn't able to do clear completely
could you please guide me hoe to solve it

[kevingurney]

@ShaiviAgarwal2 - I believe what is happening here is a result of the fact that Visual Studio is a Multi Configuration Generator (as opposed to a Single Configuration Generator like Make). Multi Configuration Generators ignore the value of CMAKE_BUILD_TYPE. As a side effect, it appears to be defaulting to the value Debug, despite the fact that we are explicitly building in Release mode in CI via matlab_build.sh (--config Release).

The following section from the CMake documentation on Build Configurations describes what seems to be going on here in more detail:

https://cmake.org/cmake/help/latest/manual/cmake-buildsystem.7.html#build-configurations

To make this work as desired, I believe we will need to use a generator expression to check if a Debug build is being performed with Visual Studio, rather than using a conditional, config-time check based on the value CMAKE_BUILD_TYPE.

[kevingurney]

@ShaiviAgarwal2 - are you still planning on working on this?

If there aren't any additional updates in the next few days, then I think it is probably reasonable to assume this PR has gone stale and to close it for now. We can always follow up with another PR if anyone (including you) wants to revisit this later.

[ShaiviAgarwal2]

@ShaiviAgarwal2 - are you still planning on working on this?

If there aren't any additional updates in the next few days, then I think it is probably reasonable to assume this PR has gone stale and to close it for now. We can always follow up with another PR if anyone (including you) wants to revisit this later.

@kevingurney I am working on it
According to me, only one check was not successful everything else is perfect
So could you please tell me or guide me on what all things need to be done by me

[kevingurney]

@ShaiviAgarwal2 - please refer to my previous comment about using generator expressions:

#39595 (comment)