> On Mar 6, 2019, at 6:49 AM, Boris Kolpackov <boris_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
> Ben Boeckel via Modules <modules_at_[hidden]> writes:
>
>>> On Wed, Mar 06, 2019 at 16:26:25 +0200, Boris Kolpackov wrote:
>>>
>>> The compiler may also find a BMI that is out-of-date.
>>
>> That's a problem in the build graph, not the compiler. An error would be
>> nice though if the compiler can divine "out-of-date" somehow (I'd expect
>> it to result in a linker error later today).
>
> I was referring to the case where BMIs for header units are found via
> some sort of search path. Which is, it seems, where things are leaning
> towards with the idea of letting the compiler locate the BMIs and fall
> back to real headers if not found.

I strongly prefer a direct 1:1 mapping for header units too.

> But if direct, one-to-one mapping is supplied by the build system
> (as I believe it should be done), then, yes, an out-of-date BMI
> would indicate a build system problem.
> _______________________________________________
> Tooling mailing list
> Tooling_at_[hidden]
> http://www.open-std.org/mailman/listinfo/tooling