[PATCH] D113545: [C++20] [Module] Support reachable definition initially/partially

[Chuanqi Xu via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

ChuanqiXu added a comment.

In D113545#3601031 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D113545#3601031>, @iains wrote:

> I think it is helpful to collect the standard examples into one place (i.e. test/Modules) and name them for the standard version (i.e. cxx20-N-M-exO.cpp) .. because
>
> - the details of the examples do change from one version of the standard to the next, because of changes in the normative text
> - some of the examples illustrate more than one bullet point
> - it makes it easier to find them for someone who is starting work on this area.
>
> (not a big deal, but now we have some on one place and some in another - which is why I had missed that you already had one of the cases)
>
> I will rebase my changes on this - and I have a patch for the 10.5 PMF issues (under test),

I prefer to put them under test/CXX/module/xxx. Since it looks like test/CXX is intended to match the standard wording. Another reason is that it looks like we prefer to cite standard in the style of [module.context]p7 instead of 10.6-p7 since the number might change. And you mentioned it too.

> some of the examples illustrate more than one bullet point

It doesn't matter since the example it self would live in a certain paragraph.

> it makes it easier to find them for someone who is starting work on this area.

I feel like it would be helpful to put them under CXX since the tests under modules mixed many things about OC modules and Clang modules. The reason why some tests of the revision lives in test/Modules is might be hard to find the corresponding wording in the standard. But for things which is clearly corresponding to the standard, I always put them in test/CXX.


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D113545/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D113545