cor3ntin wrote:
> > I think the approach looks good.
> > Do we have existing tests for the use of `module` as an identifier outside
> > of a module declaration?
>
> IIUC, do you mean something looks like the following? I didn't find it in the
> test case:
>
> ```
> void foo() {
> int module = 0;
> }
> ```
Yes, it might be useful to have that somewhere
I think in `ParseModuleDecl`, you want to reset the lexer kind before parsing
attributes.
(and add tests for that)
Here is a test:
```cpp
#define ATTRS [[]]
#define SEMICOLON
module unexpanded : unexpanded : ATTRS SEMICOLON
```
Sorry i did not notice that earlier.
The goal of the paper is that the name of the module is not a macro. everything
else can be, including attributes attached to the module
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/90574
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
