On Mon, 9 Mar 2020 at 12:13, Nathan Sidwell via Modules <
modules_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> On 3/8/20 5:01 PM, Bryce Adelstein Lelbach aka wash via Ext wrote:
> > Do we have any ABI stability concerns regarding modularizing the
> > standard library? Certainly for strong module ownership implementations,
> > this is a concern, but for weak module ownership implementations it may
> > be a concern too, because the mangling of internal implementation
> > details with module linkage would change.
> >
> > Can implementations overcome this with special hacks for the standard
> > library that preserve the old mangled names?
>
> Some pushed for a breaking ABI change in Prague. This might be their
> opportunity!
>

In Prague, the ABI breaking of modularization were known, I can't recall if
they were mentioned
The existence of a weak model also tend to show that wg21 wants to
prioritize abi stability over reliability

>
> nathan
>
> --
> Nathan Sidwell
> _______________________________________________
> Modules mailing list
> Modules_at_[hidden]
> Subscription: https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/modules
> Link to this post: http://lists.isocpp.org/modules/2020/03/0823.php
>