http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40958
--- Comment #14 from Joost VandeVondele <Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch> --- (In reply to Janne Blomqvist from comment #13) I believe a lot of progress has been made indeed. > However, the fundamental(?) issue of module sizes growing exponentially with > deep module hierarchies still remains. The solution to that is to not > include transitive dependencies, which in turn would require a module cache > for good performance. Whether that is worth doing, and who is willing and > able to do it, is unclear. note that there could also be disadvantages for that solution. For example, dependencies for a given .F would be more difficult to find (i.e. not just the USE statements). I'm not sure what implications that would have e.g. for 'smart' recompilation (i.e. based on time stamps of .mod). The module cache would also not work very well for the (common, I guess) case of having a single module per file, and all USE statements on top. It might thus be that the current state is the sweet spot.
