Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2022 17:14:31 +0000
My suspicion is that "modules" as units complicates more the conversation than clarifies things. As evidenced by examples given throughout where people keep falling back to today's conventional world of headers+library objects.
-- Gaby
________________________________
From: David Blaikie <dblaikie_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Friday, March 4, 2022 9:10:18 AM
To: David Blaikie via SG15 <sg15_at_[hidden]>
Cc: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr_at_[hidden]>
Subject: Re: [SG15] Meeting on Friday March 4th at 9AM Pacific.
On Fri, Mar 4, 2022 at 8:48 AM Gabriel Dos Reis via SG15 <sg15_at_[hidden]<mailto:sg15_at_[hidden]>> wrote:
A library can be madr of several modules, so if the hypothesis is that only modules interface files (e.g. ixx or cppm files) are provided for that library along with a static or shared object, why are we focusing on modules as basic units instead of taking libraries as basic units?
Using libraries as the unit is what Daniel's other thread/proposal "Exploring another alternative for Distributing C++ Module Libraries" explored - looking up the library location (doesn't work for header-only libraries, though, and requires either some interaction with the linker, or duplicating some of the linker search logic) and then finding a configuration file there that described all the modules owned by the library.
I think we started with modules as the unit because it potentially simplified discovery - by using the module name to locate the module interface source and its build configuration information. (still another search-path to search, but maybe a simpler one than the library search path with its extra suffixes and prefixes? Not sure)
-- Gaby
________________________________
From: SG15 <sg15-bounces_at_[hidden]<mailto:sg15-bounces_at_[hidden]>> on behalf of René Ferdinand Rivera Morell via SG15 <sg15_at_[hidden]<mailto:sg15_at_[hidden]>>
Sent: Friday, March 4, 2022 8:37:31 AM
To: ISO C++ Tooling Study Group <sg15_at_[hidden]<mailto:sg15_at_[hidden]>>
Cc: René Ferdinand Rivera Morell <grafikrobot_at_[hidden]<mailto:grafikrobot_at_[hidden]>>
Subject: Re: [SG15] Meeting on Friday March 4th at 9AM Pacific.
On Fri, Mar 4, 2022 at 10:25 AM Olga Arkhipova via SG15 <sg15_at_[hidden]<mailto:sg15_at_[hidden]>> wrote:
Boost is header only (IIRC), so user just needs to add its directories to the Include dirs.
Boost is a mixture of header-only, header+source, and dual-mode individual libraries. Although the default distribution of Boost is source without binaries. The binaries, i.e. DLLs and/or LIBs, are generated by users and packaging providers.
-- Gaby
________________________________
From: David Blaikie <dblaikie_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Friday, March 4, 2022 9:10:18 AM
To: David Blaikie via SG15 <sg15_at_[hidden]>
Cc: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr_at_[hidden]>
Subject: Re: [SG15] Meeting on Friday March 4th at 9AM Pacific.
On Fri, Mar 4, 2022 at 8:48 AM Gabriel Dos Reis via SG15 <sg15_at_[hidden]<mailto:sg15_at_[hidden]>> wrote:
A library can be madr of several modules, so if the hypothesis is that only modules interface files (e.g. ixx or cppm files) are provided for that library along with a static or shared object, why are we focusing on modules as basic units instead of taking libraries as basic units?
Using libraries as the unit is what Daniel's other thread/proposal "Exploring another alternative for Distributing C++ Module Libraries" explored - looking up the library location (doesn't work for header-only libraries, though, and requires either some interaction with the linker, or duplicating some of the linker search logic) and then finding a configuration file there that described all the modules owned by the library.
I think we started with modules as the unit because it potentially simplified discovery - by using the module name to locate the module interface source and its build configuration information. (still another search-path to search, but maybe a simpler one than the library search path with its extra suffixes and prefixes? Not sure)
-- Gaby
________________________________
From: SG15 <sg15-bounces_at_[hidden]<mailto:sg15-bounces_at_[hidden]>> on behalf of René Ferdinand Rivera Morell via SG15 <sg15_at_[hidden]<mailto:sg15_at_[hidden]>>
Sent: Friday, March 4, 2022 8:37:31 AM
To: ISO C++ Tooling Study Group <sg15_at_[hidden]<mailto:sg15_at_[hidden]>>
Cc: René Ferdinand Rivera Morell <grafikrobot_at_[hidden]<mailto:grafikrobot_at_[hidden]>>
Subject: Re: [SG15] Meeting on Friday March 4th at 9AM Pacific.
On Fri, Mar 4, 2022 at 10:25 AM Olga Arkhipova via SG15 <sg15_at_[hidden]<mailto:sg15_at_[hidden]>> wrote:
Boost is header only (IIRC), so user just needs to add its directories to the Include dirs.
Boost is a mixture of header-only, header+source, and dual-mode individual libraries. Although the default distribution of Boost is source without binaries. The binaries, i.e. DLLs and/or LIBs, are generated by users and packaging providers.
-- -- René Ferdinand Rivera Morell -- Don't Assume Anything -- No Supone Nada -- Robot Dreams - http://robot-dreams.net<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Frobot-dreams.net%2F&data=04%7C01%7Cgdr%40microsoft.com%7Ca6e7a9884b2e434e57fc08d9fe01e2da%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637820106327018171%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=T4YAUvN%2BXpcQB7bZQ2ngumTjL6btaHJRYoqucVpFWGg%3D&reserved=0> _______________________________________________ SG15 mailing list SG15_at_[hidden]<mailto:SG15_at_[hidden]> https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/sg15<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.isocpp.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo.cgi%2Fsg15&data=04%7C01%7Cgdr%40microsoft.com%7Ca6e7a9884b2e434e57fc08d9fe01e2da%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637820106327068169%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=hmBSjYR9tnQXZGnEOob6a0t%2FwPMmbX8gRBM3IfHLNCA%3D&reserved=0>
Received on 2022-03-04 17:14:34