[cfe-dev] [Modules TS] Have the file formats been decided?

[Manuel Klimek via cfe-dev]

On Sun, Jan 22, 2017, 5:50 AM Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 3:12 AM, Manuel Klimek via cfe-dev <
> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 1:15 AM Stephen Kelly via cfe-dev <
> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
> Richard Smith via cfe-dev wrote:
>
> > This does mean that build systems will need to track interface
> > dependencies in a way they didn't before (you need to know which module
> > interfaces should be built before which other module interfaces), and
> that
> > information will either need to be provided or detected by the build
> > system. If a build system wishes to automate this, it would not be
> > dissimilar to the #include scanning that some existing build systems
> > already perform.
>
> In my perspective the biggest problem with clang modules (and the reason I
> stopped investigating it from a buildsystem perspective) is
>
>  https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=21593
>
> I tried reaching out several times about that issue, but so far I still
> don't know how you will solve it.
>
> After that is reported as solvable or solved (is the situation different
> today compared to 2014?), I'd like to investigate other buildsystem related
> issues with modules in CMake. Unless I'm missing something, that's
> currently
> a waste of time for me given that I'm on linux and I can't see a future for
> the current design there. I hope I'm just missing something.
>
>
> I believe explicit module maps solve your problem, but your bug doesn't
> contain enough information to know what you want :)
> Generally, a lot has changed since 2014. I believe explicit modules fully
> solve your problem, but on the other hand, I don't think we're ready for
> modular builds via package distributors for quite some time yet.
>
>
> Explicit module maps (and the associated notion of explicit build steps to
> build the .pcm files) provides the primitive mechanism which enables robust
> integration of modules into build systems and all sorts of flexibility.
> However, simply having the mechanism available does not directly solve the
> issue linked in that bug or many related issues, which are largely social /
> historical issues. One such such problem is ensuring that C++ code using
> modules can interoperate across different build systems.
>

Correct.


> -- Sean Silva
>
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Steve.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cfe-dev mailing list
> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cfe-dev mailing list
> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20170122/4408e481/attachment.html>