================
@@ -400,24 +389,27 @@ And the compilation process for module units are like:
mod1.cppm -> clang++ mod1.cppm ... -> mod1.pcm --,--> clang++
mod1.pcm ... -> mod1.o -+
src2.cpp ----------------------------------------+> clang++
src2.cpp -------> src2.o -'
-As the diagrams show, we need to compile the BMI from module units to object
files and link the object files.
-(But we can't do this for the BMI from header units. See the later section for
the definition of header units)
+As the diagrams show, we need to compile the BMI from module units to object
+files and then link the object files. (However, we can't do this for the BMI
+from header units. See the section on :ref:`header units <header-units>` for
+more details.
-If we want to create a module library, we can't just ship the BMIs in an
archive.
-We must compile these BMIs(``*.pcm``) into object files(``*.o``) and add those
object files to the archive instead.
+BMIs cannot be shipped in an archive to create a module library. Instead, the
+BMIs(``*.pcm``) are compiled into object files(``*.o``) and those object files
+are added to the archive instead.
-Consistency Requirement
-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+Consistency Requirements
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-If we envision modules as a cache to speed up compilation, then - as with
other caching techniques -
-it is important to keep cache consistency.
-So **currently** Clang will do very strict check for consistency.
+If modules are thought of as a kind of cache to speed up compilation, then, as
+with other caching techniques, it is important to keep cache consistency. Clang
+does very strict checking for that.
Options consistency
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
-The language option of module units and their non-module-unit users should be
consistent.
-The following example is not allowed:
+Language dialect compiler options for module units and their non-module-unit
----------------
ChuanqiXu9 wrote:
This is my first time to see the term `Language dialect compiler options`.
Maybe it is better to explain the language option as compiler options may
affect the semantics of the program if the term "language option" is not clear?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/90237
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
