[PATCH] D122394: [C++20][Modules] Correct an assert for modules-ts.

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rGcf396c56e7df: [C++20][Modules] Correct an assert for modules-ts. (authored by iains). Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D122394/new/

[PATCH] D122394: [C++20][Modules] Correct an assert for modules-ts.

urnathan accepted this revision. urnathan added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. Understood. To document the approach: 1. clearly separate -fmodules-ts semantics (which are vague in places, but whatever) 2. implement c++20 modules semantics 3a) switch -fmodules-ts

[PATCH] D122394: [C++20][Modules] Correct an assert for modules-ts.

iains added a comment. In D122394#3405338 , @urnathan wrote: > Is this because of history that ModulesTS option != p1103 modules? I thought > we wanted to make the former become the latter (i.e. ModuleTS is the same as > CPlusPlusModules) This seems

[PATCH] D122394: [C++20][Modules] Correct an assert for modules-ts.

urnathan added a comment. Is this because of history that ModulesTS option != p1103 modules? I thought we wanted to make the former become the latter (i.e. ModuleTS is the same as CPlusPlusModules) This seems to be moving in the wrong direction. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo

[PATCH] D122394: [C++20][Modules] Correct an assert for modules-ts.

iains created this revision. Herald added a project: All. iains added a reviewer: urnathan. iains published this revision for review. iains added a comment. Herald added a project: clang. Herald added a subscriber: cfe-commits. somewhat on the trivial side. When adding the support for modules