Naming flag for specifying the output file name for Binary Module Interface files
Nathan Sidwell
nathan@acm.org
Wed Dec 7 16:43:15 GMT 2022
On 12/7/22 10:23, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, 7 Dec 2022, 02:30 chuanqi.xcq via Gcc, <gcc@gcc.gnu.org
> <mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>> wrote:
\
>
> (2) If (1) is not acceptable and we love to keep the command line
> consistency, I think clang can use '-fmodule-output=' as long as we make it
> clear in the document. It will be confusing but it may be the cost clang
> need to pay for the extension (so I'll vote against strongly if someone want
> to add some other extensions)
>
>
> Given that C++20 modules are in an ISO standard and clang modules aren't, I
> think it's right that the "simple" name refers to C++20 modules, without
> requiring "std-c++-modules". It also seems right that the difficulty of
> distinguishing clang modules from std modules should be dealt with by clang, not
> by other compilers.
Wait, why does clang want different options to specify the name of the
clang-module file vs a C++ module file? It's only in one mode at a time isn't
it? And that mode is controlled by other options. It cannot generate both in a
single compilation, right?
nathan
--
Nathan Sidwell
More information about the Gcc
mailing list