<table border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="8">
<tr>
<th>Issue</th>
<td>
<a href=https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/145779>145779</a>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th>Summary</th>
<td>
[clang][modules] Change --print-library-module-manifest-path to --print-std-module-manifest-path ??
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th>Labels</th>
<td>
clang
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th>Assignees</th>
<td>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th>Reporter</th>
<td>
evantorrie
</td>
</tr>
</table>
<pre>
In #76451, @ChuanqiXu9 made [this suggestion](https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/76451#discussion_r1437330950_)
```suggestion
def print_std_module_manifest_path : Flag<["-", "--"], "print-std-module-manifest-path">,
```
While the name of the variable (via the `def ...`) was changed, the actual text of the command line argument was left as `--print-library-module-manifest-path`.
Has this ship sailed? Or is there still time to standardize this so that the option better reflects its semantics – which is to print only the C++ standard library modules manifest -- not "general" library module manifests as I understand it.
</pre>
<img width="1" height="1" alt="" src="http://email.email.llvm.org/o/eJyUVE2vqzYQ_TXDZkTkGJyEBYt7k4f6Vl22u2iACbgydmoPeb399RWQvF49tVKLEBg8c-ac-TClZAfPXIN5B3PJaJYxxJof5CXEaDlrQ_9Rf_UIujgeSrMHfUYo1Xmcyf9uf50rnKhnBPMuo02Y5mHgJDZ4MBfQp1HknqB4A92AbgYr49zuujCBbpx7vF75PYbfuBPQzX12DnTzjFX0NnVzSjb4a9yXxbEoVGXUFXQF6gLq7fk8qO3-FH7d6PmG92i9XJP01yn0s-PrRN7eOMn1TjIiFG_YOBqgOC9J0DoHrVeVWufrehGyfq5IeZI-35DyF1K-IC2mxRfQ5x84fSb6y2gdo4yMnibGcFvXD4qWWscI-vSwtP6Dg1rI73a7BUJX-I0SdiP5gfuFzmJDnczkUPgPeUF1YZrI9-isZ6Q4zBN7WX0d3wQpLcB5vilxto0UP_5ZzUHtPjP_iRJuFR7tHRNZxz0UDeLPEe2yxZExiXUOxU6MEjAJ-Z5ib__kp2tAGUlWouG-VAlbFuGIkW-OO0loJWHiibzYLiF80XBSUBX4bbTduAYKW0ExePexIp1Bv4N-_x4On7Jwk5XwpQvzHH2QpZIDe47kQOsfrL8bpyVXX3H2PccVGa08E4Kfrqyvi74qKsq43h-NOp1KpctsrNuSWjqVRp327a3TrS5N2RUtV6U6cdm1ma210kYdtNFq8dmVh71q28rs26Nic7tBqXgi63bLhOxCHDKb0sz1vjTHY5U5atmleuvZzpEftl7NYr2OVDsPCUrlbJL0N4RYceu0bx7mAub9mScwFzyvDYb_pUGWSrzs_m0kEIoGiiabo6v_90mwqk2gm6fgR63_CgAA__8ftX_f">