ChuanqiXu added a comment. In D126694#3638069 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D126694#3638069>, @iains wrote:
> In D126694#3637690 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D126694#3637690>, @ChuanqiXu > wrote: > >> In D126694#3635207 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D126694#3635207>, @iains wrote: >> >>> @rsmith, @ChuanqiXu apologies for the multiple revisions, this has turned >>> out to be much more involved than I imagined from the standard's text. >>> >>> In D126694#3629254 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D126694#3629254>, @ChuanqiXu >>> wrote: >>> >>>> In D126694#3629251 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D126694#3629251>, @iains >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> In D126694#3629094 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D126694#3629094>, @ChuanqiXu >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> BTW, after I applied the patch, the compiler crashes at >>>>>> https://github.com/ChuanqiXu9/stdmodules. >>>>> >>>>> That link points to a project - is there (say) a gist of the crash >>>>> information? >>>> >>>> Here is the crash log: >>> >>> this code now compiles without error, >> >> Thanks for looking into it! >> >> My personal plan for this revision is to review the details after we add >> more large tests (at least we have a more complete std modules >> implementation and I am trying for it. But I find another bug now). So we >> might need to wait for a while for this patch. How do you think about it? > > Well, the difficulty there is that "add more large tests" is not a very > specific objective. > I will be first to say that we can tell that the implementation here is > necessary, but we cannot tell if it is sufficient - however, IMO we need to > find a more definite way to make progress. Yeah, clearness matters. Let me try to state my idea clearly: (1) Make std modules sufficient to be able to cover at least <thread>, <vector>, <string>, <algorithm>, <memory> and <atomic>. So that we could run the tests from cppreference at least. (2) Make https://github.com/alibaba/async_simple/tree/CXX20Modules compilable by clang trunk and std modules Then we could use (1) or (2) to check some relatively large patches (including this one but not limited). In this way, I feel like we have more confident to say the C++20 Modules in Clang is workable. (Tests is never enough. I know). I would like to see how far I can go in the next month. So I would like to give a more specific answer what test ((1) or (2) or others) we need to use. I think one month might not be super long time in this area. How do you think about it? --- BTW, I've sent two patches to enhance the usability: D128974 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D128974> and D129068 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D129068>. And I am fighting with the other problems. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D126694/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D126694 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
