Daniel Ruoso via SG15 <sg15_at_[hidden]> writes:

> Open question 1: Is it useful to differentiate non-modular units that
> import other modules (header or named) from the ones that don't?

I can see how this could be used by a build system (e.g., to skip a
scan, etc).


> If so, what terms do we want to use?

"Legacy Unit" ?


> 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".

To me, at the conceptual level, this is a module-private interface
unit that happens to use the partition syntax. Also, it probably
makes sense to consider that in the future we may want to have an
implementation unit (along the lines of the MSVC extension mentioned
in another thread). So perhaps:

"Module Internal Interface Partition Unit"
"Module Internal Implementation Partition Unit"

Or:

"Module-Private Interface Partition Unit"
"Module-Private Implementation Partition Unit"