iains added a comment. In D122394#3405338 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D122394#3405338>, @urnathan wrote:
> Is this because of history that ModulesTS option != p1103 modules? I thought > we wanted to make the former become the latter (i.e. ModuleTS is the same as > CPlusPlusModules) This seems to be moving in the wrong direction. This is because we are not removing the fmodules-ts flag (nor. at this point, the code that it changes) - as I understand things. So I have now to fix (next patch) the problem that we currently generate wrong code for static vars and lambdas in modules since the linkage is defaulting to the modules-ts "module internal" model. So, unless we shift priorities such that we take a detour to remove the modules-ts support, I need to make this change to avoid the assert firing for -fmodules-ts (it seems we have limited testing - since nothing fired until I tried to make other changes form my patchset). Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D122394/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D122394 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
