ChuanqiXu9 wrote: > FWIW, we saw failures at Google (where, to the best of my knowledge, we > aren't using named modules at all) that look like this: > > ``` > error: '#include <filename>' attaches the declarations to the named module > '.get', which is not usually intended; consider moving that directive before > the module declaration [-Werror,-Winclude-angled-in-module-purview] > 14 | #include <stddef.h> > ``` > > So there's probably some problems with this patch? is this enough to go on, > or would a reduced test case be required to address the issue? (reducing > modules issues is a bit difficult/expensive, or I'd have provided it up front)
Since the patch itself is pretty simple, if there is a problem, it should come from the implementation `Preprocessor::isInNamedModule()`. It should be helpful to provide a reproducer so that we can be sure we're facing the same issue. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/69555 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
