dblaikie added a comment.
> What was the objection to "-fc++-module-filename[=]" ?
I guess it reads a bit awkwardly when you aren't providing the filename/want
the default filename?
> GCC has "-fmodule-only"
Hmm, I don't mind that too much (& as you say, '-fobject-only' - though that
flag is maybe too vague?) - but it does mean we'd need a separate flag to name
the .pcm output file, because that flag ('-fmodule-only') wouldn't be present
in all cases where the pcm is generated, only when it's pcm-but-no-object.
Maybe less "exclusionary" flag names and more explicit (like
'-fbuild-the-binary-module' and '-fbuild-the-object'). I guess most C++ GCC
options ( https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Option-Summary.html ) don't
include "C++" in them, but the modules ones mostly include "module".
We could get out in front, planning for the world in which BMIs are really only
the interface (& whatever else we want to carry for optimizing /use/ of that
interface, but not complete enough to be usable for generating the modules
object) and use `-fmodule-interface[=]` (skipping the 'binary' part) and
`-fmodule-implementation` or `-fmodule-object` (which could go either way -
default on or off, but provide `-fno-module-object` to do the "generate PCM
only")?
Only other minor thing might be singular V plural - some of Clang's flags are
`-fmodules` and others are `-fmodule` - any sense of what's likely to work
better? (be nice to unify/standardize on one or the other, I can see having
variation there might make for frustrating usability trying to remember which
is which)
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D137058/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D137058
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
