On 19 Sep 2016 6:53 pm, "Manman via cfe-commits"
wrote:
On Sep 19, 2016, at 5:55 PM, Richard Smith via cfe-commits <
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
Your c.h is not correct. It would introduce a definition of c in every file
where it's included, so it's not a modular header.
Hi Richard,
W
> On Sep 19, 2016, at 5:55 PM, Richard Smith via cfe-commits
> wrote:
>
> Your c.h is not correct. It would introduce a definition of c in every file
> where it's included, so it's not a modular header.
Hi Richard,
What do you mean by c.h is not correct? It is guarded by a macro, so if we ar
Your c.h is not correct. It would introduce a definition of c in every file
where it's included, so it's not a modular header.
On 19 Sep 2016 5:21 pm, "Manman via cfe-commits"
wrote:
>
> Hi Richard & Ben,
>
> Given a simple testing case, where we have two submodules X.A (A.h) and
> X.B (B.h, it
Hi Richard & Ben,
Given a simple testing case, where we have two submodules X.A (A.h) and X.B
(B.h, it includes C.h, and C.h is guarded with a macro), when we import X.A and
then textually include a header C.h, we get redefinition error. This is because
the macro guard is owned by module X.B t