C++ Logo


Advanced search

Revisiting terminology, framing for meeting on 2022-05-13

From: Daniel Ruoso <daniel_at_[hidden]>
Date: Wed, 11 May 2022 11:16:14 -0400

We are going to discuss this at the meeting on Friday, so I wanted to
get a summary of where we are on this discussion, what are the points
that we are closer to consensus on, and what are the open questions.
Hopefully this will make the conversation easier to drive.

Point of Consensus 1: We seem to generally agree with the broad
categorization between "importable units" and "non-importable units".
This is useful for tooling in general, since they give the main
distinction on whether or not a bmi needs to be produced.

Point of Consensus 2: While we didn't discuss this in the thread, this
seems to be a terminology we're using consistently, so it's worth
settling on it. The terms "Named Module Units" and "Header Units"
allow us to differentiate between the two kinds of importable units.

Point of Consensus 3: "Primary Module Interface Unit" and "Module
Interface Partition Unit" are terms that we don't seem to have any
contention over.

Point of Consensus 4: "Module implementation Units" is also a term
that we don't seem to have any contention about.

Point of Consensus 5: "Non-Modular Units" in order to refer to a
translation unit that is not declaring or defining anything in a named
module, although it may import modules.

Open question 1: Is it useful to differentiate non-modular units that
import other modules (header or named) from the ones that don't? If
so, what terms do we want to use?

Open question 2: What do we call a "Module partition" which "does not
contribute to the external interface"? We seem to have a contention
between "Module Internal Partition Unit" and "Module Implementation
Partition Unit".

Hope this helps,


Received on 2022-05-11 15:16:26