Re: [PATCH RESEND 0/1] RFC: P1689R5 support

2022-10-19 Thread Martin Liška
On 10/18/22 14:22, Ben Boeckel wrote: > On Thu, Oct 13, 2022 at 13:08:46 -0400, David Malcolm wrote: >> On Mon, 2022-10-10 at 16:21 -0400, Jason Merrill wrote: >>> David Malcolm would probably know best about JSON wrangling. >> >> Unfortunately our JSON output doesn't make any guarantees about the

Re: [PATCH RESEND 0/1] RFC: P1689R5 support

2022-10-18 Thread Ben Boeckel via Gcc-patches
On Thu, Oct 13, 2022 at 13:08:46 -0400, David Malcolm wrote: > On Mon, 2022-10-10 at 16:21 -0400, Jason Merrill wrote: > > David Malcolm would probably know best about JSON wrangling. > > Unfortunately our JSON output doesn't make any guarantees about the > ordering of keys within an object, so

Re: [PATCH RESEND 0/1] RFC: P1689R5 support

2022-10-13 Thread David Malcolm via Gcc-patches
On Mon, 2022-10-10 at 16:21 -0400, Jason Merrill wrote: > On 10/4/22 11:11, Ben Boeckel wrote: > > This patch adds initial support for ISO C++'s [P1689R5][], a format > > for > > describing C++ module requirements and provisions based on the > > source > > code. This is required because compiling

Re: [PATCH RESEND 0/1] RFC: P1689R5 support

2022-10-10 Thread Jason Merrill via Gcc-patches
On 10/4/22 11:11, Ben Boeckel wrote: This patch adds initial support for ISO C++'s [P1689R5][], a format for describing C++ module requirements and provisions based on the source code. This is required because compiling C++ with modules is not embarrassingly parallel and need to be ordered to

[PATCH RESEND 0/1] RFC: P1689R5 support

2022-10-04 Thread Ben Boeckel
This patch adds initial support for ISO C++'s [P1689R5][], a format for describing C++ module requirements and provisions based on the source code. This is required because compiling C++ with modules is not embarrassingly parallel and need to be ordered to ensure that `import some_module;` can be