================ Comment at: include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticLexKinds.td:626 @@ -625,1 +625,3 @@ +def note_implicit_top_level_module_import_here : Note< + "submodule of top-level module '%0' implicitly imported here">; def warn_uncovered_module_header : Warning< ---------------- benlangmuir wrote: > I'd just drop "submodule of top-level ". I think it's an important qualification because the module that was in fact imported is not %0. %0 is the top-level module containing it, and the error is because some submodule of %0 (perhaps the one being imported, perhaps not) has the missing file.
>From a user's perspective: "The header I included didn't ask for %0 to be >imported. It asked for this submodule of it". Ideally we would be able to >somehow communicate the "unity build" aspect of top-level modules for this to >make sense, but I couldn't find a way to fit all that in a diagnostic. Does that make sense? http://reviews.llvm.org/D10423 EMAIL PREFERENCES http://reviews.llvm.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/ _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
