5 ms·
Clang modules for C++ are going nowhere as long as the concerned working group of WG21 isn't proposing anything. While it seems that everybody has almost the s
by pmr_ 13y ago
Clang modules for C++ are going nowhere as long as the concerned working group of WG21 isn't proposing anything.
While it seems that everybody has almost the same idea how modules should look as part of the language almost no one can agree on how they should be specified or what part of a module should actually be specified at all.
- comex 13y agoI was under the impression that clang is not waiting for standardization to implement this stuff (indeed, C frameworks on OS X already ship module.map files). Am I wrong?
- pmr_ 13y agoAFAIK the main reason for implementing modules for C++ was to show that it can be done, which makes standardization of a major feature much more likely. As long as there is only one compiler and no guarantee that you will not have to change everything once again as standardization is complete no one is going to touch a large cross-platform codebase and add module support.
- comex 13y agoWell, if the performance gain is enough, I certainly would. (The codebase I'm thinking of is not huge, but large enough that I think modules would make a significant compile speed difference.) I think that with the current implementation, if your header files are sane (no depending on previously included files) you can autogenerate a module map file, one module per header, and have it just work. But I'm not sure if there are any wrinkles, because in the current state all I was able to achieve was clang crashing.