Naming flag for specifying the output file name for Binary Module Interface files

[Nathan Sidwell]

On 12/7/22 11:18, Iain Sandoe wrote:

> I think it is reasonable to include c++ in the spelling, since other languages supported by
> GCC (and clang in due course) have modules.

I disagree (about the reasonableness part).  Other languages have modules, true, 
but if they want to name the output file, why not have the same option spelling?

I.e. why are we considering:

    $compiler -fc++-module-file=bob foo.cc
    $compiler -ffortran-module-file=bob foo.f77

The language is being selected implicitly by the file suffix (or explictly via 
-X$lang).  There's no reason for some other option controlling an aspect of the 
compilation to rename the language.  We don't do it for language-specific 
warning options, and similar.  (i.e. no -f[no-]c++-type-aliasing vs 
-fc-type-aliasing, nor -Wc++-extra vs -Wc-extra[*]

nathan

[*] I'll grant there is -Weffective-c++, but that's somewhat out of date now.
-- 
Nathan Sidwell