[PATCH] D128328: [C++20][Modules] Improve handing of Private Module Fragment diagnostics.

[Iain Sandoe via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

iains added a comment.

In D128328#3603953 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D128328#3603953>, @ChuanqiXu wrote:

> In D128328#3603945 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D128328#3603945>, @iains wrote:
>
>> In D128328#3603942 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D128328#3603942>, @ChuanqiXu wrote:
>>
>>> In D128328#3603940 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D128328#3603940>, @iains wrote:
>>>
>>>> In D128328#3602646 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D128328#3602646>, @iains wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In D128328#3601080 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D128328#3601080>, @ChuanqiXu wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> It looks like we need to handle inline variable as well to match the intention.
>>>>>
>>>>> can you construct a test-case, where this would apply and which is not already diagnosed as incorrect?
>>>>
>>>> Did you have some ideas here?



> I feel like the following one should be the test case:
>
>   export module A;
>   [export] inline int a;
>
> Here the inline variable 'a' is declared in the definition domain but not defined. This violates [dcl.inline]p7:
>
>> If an inline function or variable that is attached to a named module is declared in a definition domain, it shall be defined in that domain.

hmm ... isn't that implicitly initialised with 0?

> Also, **if** [module.private.frag]p2.1 is changed into:
>
>> the point by which the definition of an [exported] inline function or variable is required
>
> The test above would cover this too.
>
> BTW, it shows we could lack test like:
>
>   export module A;
>   [export] inline void func(); // no definition in the definition domain

I think the current impl. should catch that - the only difference would be that, in the case there's a definition in the PMF, there would be a note about the unreachable definition.

> The meaning of [export] depends on the result of the feedback from WG21.

yes, I saw your post to ext.


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D128328/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D128328