Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2024 13:42:25 +0200
I don't see how "writing a build system" is related to compile-time file
I/O.
On Tue, Mar 12, 2024 at 1:32 PM Andrei Grosu via Std-Proposals <
std-proposals_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> The proposal is simple: constexpr support for the filesystem API.
>
> The need comes from writing a build system in (modern) C++.
> If there is support for compile-time access to the filesystem , it would
> be , in my opinion, the key missing piece for a build system implemented
> in modern C++.
> Without that you would have to depend on code generation , but with it ,
> there is not much missing to build a fully featured build system in C++
> itself.
>
> Is this a question of compiler complexity , to enable constexpr filesystem
> access ? It is not clear to me if there are other factors at play.
>
> Can anyone ‘in the know’ share some insights why it might or might not be
> feasable ?
> --
> Std-Proposals mailing list
> Std-Proposals_at_[hidden]
> https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/std-proposals
>
I/O.
On Tue, Mar 12, 2024 at 1:32 PM Andrei Grosu via Std-Proposals <
std-proposals_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> The proposal is simple: constexpr support for the filesystem API.
>
> The need comes from writing a build system in (modern) C++.
> If there is support for compile-time access to the filesystem , it would
> be , in my opinion, the key missing piece for a build system implemented
> in modern C++.
> Without that you would have to depend on code generation , but with it ,
> there is not much missing to build a fully featured build system in C++
> itself.
>
> Is this a question of compiler complexity , to enable constexpr filesystem
> access ? It is not clear to me if there are other factors at play.
>
> Can anyone ‘in the know’ share some insights why it might or might not be
> feasable ?
> --
> Std-Proposals mailing list
> Std-Proposals_at_[hidden]
> https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/std-proposals
>
-- Regards, Oleksandr Koval.
Received on 2024-03-12 11:42:37