h-vetinari added a comment. It gets very confusing that phab now attaches the old review comments in the wrong place.
================ Comment at: clang/docs/CPlusPlus20Modules.rst:22 +different semantics, it might be more friendly for users who care about C++20 +modules only to create a new page. + ---------------- OK that's fine. Then this should be changed from > Due to the C++20 modules having very different semantics, it might be more > friendly for users who care about C++20 modules only to create a new page. to something like > Due to the C++20 modules having very different semantics, this page deals > with them separately. ================ Comment at: clang/docs/CPlusPlus20Modules.rst:52 +``Clang module map modules`` or ``Clang c++ modules``. + +Module and module unit ---------------- I had corrected myself on second pass, but got confused with phab and ended up not submitting it.... ================ Comment at: clang/docs/CPlusPlus20Modules.rst:64-67 +Terms enclosed in ``[]`` are optional. The syntax of ``module_name`` and ``partition_name`` +in regex form corresponds to ``[a-zA-Z_][a-zA-Z_0-9\.]*``. The dot ``.`` in the name has +no special meaning. + ---------------- ================ Comment at: clang/docs/CPlusPlus20Modules.rst:233-235 +The file name of module files should end with ``.pcm``. +The file name of the module file of a ``primary module interface unit`` should be ``module_name.pcm``. +The file name of module files of ``module partition unit`` should be ``module_name-partition_name.pcm``. ---------------- > The comes from the clang implementation. If the user don't follow the > restrictions, then the clang may fail to build the module. For example, in > the "hello world" example, if the name of module file is M.module instead of > M.pcm, the the clang would fail to find the corresponding M module. Can we add a sentence to this effect? ================ Comment at: clang/docs/CPlusPlus20Modules.rst:316-317 + +Currently Clang would accept the above example. But it may produce surprising results if the +debugging code depends on consistent use of ``NDEBUG`` also in other translation units. + ---------------- I realized afterwards that it's the inverse - debugging code might depend on the _absence_ of `NDEBUG` which switches of debug stuff. ================ Comment at: clang/docs/CPlusPlus20Modules.rst:471 +This couldn't be demangled by previous versions of the debugger or demangler. +As of LLVM 15.x, user can utilize ``llvm-cxxfilt`` to demangle this: + ---------------- ================ Comment at: clang/docs/CPlusPlus20Modules.rst:49-51 +In this document, the term ``Clang Modules``/``Clang modules`` refer to Clang +c++ modules extension. It is also known as ``Clang header modules``, +``Clang module map modules`` or ``Clang c++ modules``. ---------------- h-vetinari wrote: > Ugh, this should have been "These are". CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D131062/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D131062 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
