Maybe it's too soon for this, but can I see a Tony table for the build process? I can even start...

Code in question...
* Before
#include <iostream>
int main() {std::cout<<"Hello World\n";}
* After
import std.io
int main() {std::cout<<"Hello World\n";}

Minimal build process before...
* MSVC
vcvars64.bat
cl /EHs HelloWorld.cpp
HelloWorld.exe
* GCC
g++ HelloWorld.cpp
./a.out
* Clang
clang HelloWorld.cpp
./a.out

Minimal build process after...
???


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ext <ext-bounces_at_lists.isocpp.org> On Behalf Of Tom Honermann
> Sent: Friday, August 31, 2018 1:44 PM
> To: Nathan Sidwell <nathan_at_acm.org>; Evolution Working Group mailing list
> <ext_at_[hidden]>; WG21 Tooling Study Group SG15 <tooling_at_open-
> std.org>
> Cc: C++ Library Evolution Working Group <lib-ext_at_lists.isocpp.org>
> Subject: Re: [Ext] [Tooling] Modules and tooling: Resolving module import
> declarations
>
> On 08/31/2018 01:25 PM, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> > On 08/31/2018 12:05 PM, Tom Honermann wrote:
> >
> >> Are you referring to the module mapper approach documented at
> >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gcc.gnu.org_wiki
> >> _cxx-2Dmodules-
> 3F&d=DwIGaQ&c=I_0YwoKy7z5LMTVdyO6YCiE2uzI1jjZZuIPelcSj
> >> ixA&r=y8mub81SfUi-UCZRX0Vl1g&m=b-ZgaER9j5-_3U9ipw-k24_LU-
> NTLuokE8b6KU
> >> Tg86Q&s=i5HfnVg5UjXCB7L7-dyAGSUS4WOGA26soB1m2mk6gRQ&e=
> >
> > That documentation is pretty opaque. I can only blame myself.
>
> The fact that documentation for an experimental feature exists at all raises
> you well above the level at which criticism is justified ;)
>
> >
> >> If so, my concern with that approach is that it effectively requires
> >> a build system. Perhaps the default module mapper does not (I'm not
> >> sure exactly what it does at present. My brief tests indicate it
> >> requires a
> >
> > The defaults it has right now may not be the best defaults. (Hey, you
> > can go experiment with better defaults!)
>
> Indeed, I can - and would like to if this discussion reveals an approach that
> might have broad agreement.
>
> I'm lobbying for a position in which the default behavior is, if no suitable
> module artifact is identified, identify the module interface unit source code
> and translate it (produce and discard a module artifact if useful; or not). And
> I'm looking for the answers to "where is the module interface unit source"
> and "how do I translate it" to be available in some industry standard tool
> agnostic form that doesn't require a running build invocation (but can
> depend on a prior (partial) build).
>
> Tom.
> _______________________________________________
> Ext mailing list
> Ext_at_[hidden]
> Subscription: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-
> 3A__lists.isocpp.org_mailman_listinfo.cgi_ext&d=DwIGaQ&c=I_0YwoKy7z5L
> MTVdyO6YCiE2uzI1jjZZuIPelcSjixA&r=y8mub81SfUi-UCZRX0Vl1g&m=b-
> ZgaER9j5-_3U9ipw-k24_LU-
> NTLuokE8b6KUTg86Q&s=wCdzzdGNbO34zKR_3LjCRsXdJkJqhmj9EM_xNrQ1y
> 4k&e=
> Link to this post: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-
> 3A__lists.isocpp.org_ext_2018_08_5718.php&d=DwIGaQ&c=I_0YwoKy7z5L
> MTVdyO6YCiE2uzI1jjZZuIPelcSjixA&r=y8mub81SfUi-UCZRX0Vl1g&m=b-
> ZgaER9j5-_3U9ipw-k24_LU-
> NTLuokE8b6KUTg86Q&s=qSsZRHLeU9jVHHSr0tACq_IQ9Jl6aL_o9niC9twsUmE
> &e=