On Fri, 3 Feb 2023, 04:09 Andrew Pinski via Gcc, <gcc@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 25, 2023 at 1:07 PM Ben Boeckel via Fortran > <fort...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > This patch series adds initial support for ISO C++'s [P1689R5][], a > > format for describing C++ module requirements and provisions based on > > the source code. This is required because compiling C++ with modules is > > not embarrassingly parallel and need to be ordered to ensure that > > `import some_module;` can be satisfied in time by making sure that any > > TU with `export import some_module;` is compiled first. > > > I like how folks are complaining that GCC outputs POSIX makefile > syntax from GCC's dependency files which are supposed to be in POSIX > Makefile syntax. > It seems like rather the build tools are people like to use are not > understanding POSIX makefile syntax any more rather. > Also I am not a fan of json, it is too verbose for no use. Maybe it is > time to go back to standardizing a new POSIX makefile syntax rather > than changing C++ here. > That would take a decade or more. It's too late for POSIX 202x and the pace that POSIX agrees on makefile features is incredibly slow.
