iains planned changes to this revision. iains added a comment. In D128328#3611194 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D128328#3611194>, @ChuanqiXu wrote:
> From the discussion, it looks like the 'export' part is not necessary here > and we don't need to care about linkage in this revision. Indeed. > In D128328#3609827 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D128328#3609827>, @vsapsai wrote: > >> Sorry for changing my mind. I've thought about the errors more and >> especially about the case mentioned by Chuanqi >> >> export module A; >> [export] inline void func(); >> >> I'm afraid it can complicate the implementation but we can achieve some >> consistency with errors like >> >> export module A; >> export inline void func(); // error: no definition for exported inline >> function 'func' in module 'A' >> >> and >> >> export module A; >> export inline void func(); // error: no definition for exported inline >> function 'func' in module 'A' >> //... >> module :private; >> void func() {} // note: definition here is not reachable as it is private >> >> I think it is useful to have connection between declaration and definition >> and to explain why the definition is no good. >> >> Specific wording around "no definition | missing definition | definition >> required" is flexible. > > It makes sense to me. So I will re-work this patch to deal with the two changes (I think that the proposed merge of changes to the example should be enough to go on). Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D128328/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D128328 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits