vsapsai added a comment.
Sorry for changing my mind. I've thought about the errors more and especially
about the case mentioned by Chuanqi
export module A;
[export] inline void func();
I'm afraid it can complicate the implementation but we can achieve some
consistency with errors like
export module A;
export inline void func(); // error: no definition for exported inline
function 'func' in module 'A'
and
export module A;
export inline void func(); // error: no definition for exported inline
function 'func' in module 'A'
//...
module :private;
void func() {} // note: definition here is not reachable as it is private
I think it is useful to have connection between declaration and definition and
to explain why the definition is no good.
Specific wording around "no definition | missing definition | definition
required" is flexible.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D128328/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D128328
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
