Re: [PATCH v5 3/5] p1689r5: initial support

2023-06-25 Thread Ben Boeckel via Gcc-patches
On Fri, Jun 23, 2023 at 14:31:17 -0400, Jason Merrill wrote: > On 6/20/23 15:46, Ben Boeckel wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 16:50:27 -0500, Jason Merrill wrote: > >> On 1/25/23 13:06, Ben Boeckel wrote: > > >>> Header units (including the standard library headers) are 100% > >>> unsupported

Re: [PATCH v5 3/5] p1689r5: initial support

2023-06-23 Thread Jason Merrill via Gcc-patches
On 6/20/23 15:46, Ben Boeckel wrote: On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 16:50:27 -0500, Jason Merrill wrote: On 1/25/23 13:06, Ben Boeckel wrote: Header units (including the standard library headers) are 100% unsupported right now because the `-E` mechanism wants to import their BMIs. A new mode (i.e.,

Re: [PATCH v5 3/5] p1689r5: initial support

2023-06-20 Thread Ben Boeckel via Gcc-patches
On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 16:50:27 -0500, Jason Merrill wrote: > On 1/25/23 13:06, Ben Boeckel wrote: > > - header-unit information fields > > > > Header units (including the standard library headers) are 100% > > unsupported right now because the `-E` mechanism wants to import their > > BMIs. A

Re: [PATCH v5 3/5] p1689r5: initial support

2023-06-20 Thread Ben Boeckel via Gcc-patches
On Mon, Jun 19, 2023 at 17:33:58 -0400, Jason Merrill wrote: > On 5/12/23 10:24, Ben Boeckel wrote: > > `file` can be omitted (the `output_stream` will be used then). I *think* > > I see that adding: > > > > %{fdeps_file:-fdeps-file=%{!o:%b.ddi}%{o*:%.ddi%*}} > > %{!fdeps-file: but yes. >

Re: [PATCH v5 3/5] p1689r5: initial support

2023-06-19 Thread Jason Merrill via Gcc-patches
On 5/12/23 10:24, Ben Boeckel wrote: On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 16:50:27 -0500, Jason Merrill wrote: I notice that the actual flags are all -fdep-*, though some of them are -fdeps-* here, and the internal variables all seem to be fdeps_*. I lean toward harmonizing on "deps", I think. Done. I

Re: [PATCH v5 3/5] p1689r5: initial support

2023-05-12 Thread Ben Boeckel via Gcc-patches
On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 16:50:27 -0500, Jason Merrill wrote: > I notice that the actual flags are all -fdep-*, though some of them are > -fdeps-* here, and the internal variables all seem to be fdeps_*. I > lean toward harmonizing on "deps", I think. Done. > I don't love the three separate

Re: [PATCH v5 3/5] p1689r5: initial support

2023-02-14 Thread Jason Merrill via Gcc-patches
On 1/25/23 13:06, Ben Boeckel wrote: This patch implements support for [P1689R5][] to communicate to a build system the C++20 module dependencies to build systems so that they may build `.gcm` files in the proper order. Thanks again. Support is communicated through the following three new