jyknight added a comment. In D125773#3523459 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D125773#3523459>, @rsmith wrote:
> Header modules are part of the C++20 standard (where they are called "header > units"), and module maps are an intended way for Clang to provide this > functionality in C++20 mode. I don't think turning this off by default in > C++20 is the right forward-looking plan; rather, I think we should be > thinking about moving towards header modules simply always being something > that Clang can do, with no flag to control that. It feels unclear that using Clang's legacy module maps functionality _is_ a reasonable forward-looking way to provide this functionality for the C++20 standard. It feels to me like the models are fairly distinct and we might be better off disentangling C++20 modules from module-maps entirely (e.g. that we may continue to support Clang modules in C++20 for compatibility, but not as a way to support any C++20 standard features). Has there been some previous discussion on this topic that concluded that we do want module maps for C++20 modules support? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D125773/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D125773 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
