3 ms·

Again, they are barely functional. MSVC chokes on many standard-defined constructs: https://github.com/microsoft/STL/issues/1694 https://github.com/microsoft/S

Again, they are barely functional. MSVC chokes on many standard-defined constructs: https://github.com/microsoft/STL/issues/1694 https://github.com/microsoft/STL/issues/1694 clang does not claim to be "mostly usable" at all - most papers are not implemented: https://clang.llvm.org/cxx_status.html#cxx20 https://clang.llvm.org/cxx_status.html#cxx20 And gcc will only start ot be usable with CMake when version 14 is released - that has not happened yet. And, as I mentioned before, IDE support is either buggy (Visual Studio) or non-existing (any other IDE/OS). So you're off to writing in a text editor and hoping your compiler works to a somewhat usable degree. Yes, at some point people should start using modules, I agree, but to advise library maintainers to ship modularized code... the tooling just isn't there yet. I mean, the GitHub issue is Microsoft trying to ship their standard library modularized, they employ some of the most capable folks on the planet and pay them big money to get that done, while metaphorically sitting next to the Microsoft compiler devs, and they barely, barely get it done (with bugs, as they themselves mention). This is too much for most other library maintainers.

pjmlp 3y ago
Again, see my Github, using exclusively C++ modules for quite some time. Someone has to actually try to use modules and report bugs. Not every library has to work in all compilers of the world.
- Longhanks 3y ago
  > Ideally, anything past C++20 should be made available as module as well. > Not every library has to work in all compilers of the world. These two statements directly contradict each other. It's great that you are in a space where you can use modules, but most other people are not, and expecting them to ship modularized versions of their libraries is inconsiderate given the limitations they face.
  - pjmlp 3y ago
    I started my comment with "Ideally," which as per Oxford dictionary gets me: - perfectly; in the most suitable way - in an imagined way; in a way that is not likely to happen or be real
    - Longhanks 3y ago
      Choosing not to sympathize with the reality of most C++ devs is up to you, you've made it very clear that you refuse to acknowledge my point. No need to get snarky.
      - pjmlp 3y ago
        It is not me that lacks understating of what "Ideally,.." and "as well" means in practice, hint it is a OR, not a XOR.
        Longhanks 3y ago
        Well, you certainly lack the imagination of working with given constraints outside of your bubble, so I guess we've both learned something today.

pjmlp 3y ago

Again, see my Github, using exclusively C++ modules for quite some time. Someone has to actually try to use modules and report bugs. Not every library has to work in all compilers of the world.

Longhanks 3y ago
> Ideally, anything past C++20 should be made available as module as well. > Not every library has to work in all compilers of the world. These two statements directly contradict each other. It's great that you are in a space where you can use modules, but most other people are not, and expecting them to ship modularized versions of their libraries is inconsiderate given the limitations they face.
- pjmlp 3y ago
  I started my comment with "Ideally," which as per Oxford dictionary gets me: - perfectly; in the most suitable way - in an imagined way; in a way that is not likely to happen or be real
  - Longhanks 3y ago
    Choosing not to sympathize with the reality of most C++ devs is up to you, you've made it very clear that you refuse to acknowledge my point. No need to get snarky.
    - pjmlp 3y ago
      It is not me that lacks understating of what "Ideally,.." and "as well" means in practice, hint it is a OR, not a XOR.
      - Longhanks 3y ago
        Well, you certainly lack the imagination of working with given constraints outside of your bubble, so I guess we've both learned something today.