Yeah, those seem like great questions to be asking. Thanks, Ben.

On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 12:58 AM Boris Kolpackov <boris_at_[hidden]>
wrote:

> Ben Craig <ben.craig_at_[hidden]> writes:
>
> > * What granularity should I provide for my modules?
> > ** Do I translate headers to modules one-to-one?
> > ** Do I just have one big module for my entire library?
> > ** Something in between?
> >
> > * What file extension(s) should I use for module files?
> >
> > * How should we map module names to file names? Just by replacing
> > dots with slashes?
> >
> > * How should tools find modules?
> >
> > I know just enough about modules to ask subtly wrong questions, [...]
>
> No, these are spot on. We had to answer[1] all of these (and some more)
> while adding support for modules in build2.
>
> The problem of mapping module names to file names is especially tricky:
>
> 1. We don't want it to become tedious like specifying the mapping for
> each module explicitly would be.
>
> 2. We want decent performance from the build system so parsing each
> module interface to find its name is probably not an option.
>
> 3. We want the file names to fit the project's overall scheme (some
> might want FooBar, others foo_bar, I like foo-bar and you seem
> to prefer foo/bar).
>
> [1]
> https://build2.org/build2/doc/build2-build-system-manual.xhtml#cxx-modules
>
> Boris
> _______________________________________________
> Tooling mailing list
> Tooling_at_[hidden]
> http://www.open-std.org/mailman/listinfo/tooling
>