C++ Logo


Advanced search

Re: P2581R0: Specifying the Interoperability of Binary Module Interface Files

From: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr_at_[hidden]>
Date: Wed, 4 May 2022 11:33:40 +0000
Where is "implementation partition" defined in the standards text?

-- Gaby, not defending an tool-specific terminology, but genuinely curious

-----Original Message-----
From: SG15 <sg15-bounces_at_[hidden]> On Behalf Of Daniela Engert via SG15
Sent: Wednesday, May 4, 2022 4:27 AM
To: sg15_at_[hidden]
Cc: dani <dani_at_[hidden]>
Subject: Re: [SG15] P2581R0: Specifying the Interoperability of Binary Module Interface Files

Am 04.05.2022 um 12:46 schrieb Nathan Sidwell via SG15:
> On 5/3/22 10:32, Ben Boeckel via SG15 wrote:
>> On Tue, May 03, 2022 at 12:48:24 +0000, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
>>> I have a lot to say in this thread, but a request for the CMake folks:
>>> Please, can we avoid "module headers" or "header modules" as
>>> terminology in the community?
>>> We've settled on "header units".  If we need something more than
>>> that, please let's work on it.
>> There are currently three names used:
>>    - `CXX_MODULE_INTERNAL_PARTITIONS`: for any TU which is a partition
>>      without `export` and not an implementation unit (needs to be
>>      separate because of the `-internalPartition` flag is needed during
>>      scanning; it wouldn't be that important if the non-standard MSVC
>>      extention needed the flag and this one did not)
> IIUC these are what the std calls implementation partitions.  It is
> unfortunate the same name is not being used.

I'd also prefer this name as coined by the standard instead of a
tool-specific one.

SG15 mailing list

Received on 2022-05-04 11:33:50