New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
P1905 In-Source Mechanism to Identify Importable Headers #651
Comments
Let's start this in SG15 to get tooling expert's thoughts, and figure out the language stuff with that knowledge. |
Belfast 2019-11 Tooling Minutes P1905R0 In-Source Mechanism to Identify Importable Headers Chair: Bryce Adelstein Lelbach Champion: Corentin Jabot Minute Taker: Aaron Ballman Start Review: 11-08 10:39 Start Polling: 11:07 POLL: We want an in-source mechanism for indicating but not enforcing that a header is importable.
Attendance: 16 Authors Voting: 1 Author Position: SF A: Not clear what diagnostics are expected, concerns about how this impacts implementations that don't support implicit modules. That has consensus. POLL: We want an in-source mechanism for indicating but not enforcing that a header is NOT importable.
Attendance: 16 Authors Voting: 1 Author Position: SF That has unanimous consent. POLL: Prioritize scannability by tools in the design of a in-source mechanism that indicates whether headers are importable.
Attendance: 16 Authors Voting: 1 Author Position: SF That has unanimous consent. POLL: Explore an in-source mechanism for enforcing that a header must not be imported.
Attendance: 15 Authors Voting: 1 Author Position: F That has unanimous consent. POLL: Explore an in-source mechanism for enforcing that a header must only be imported.
Attendance: 15 Authors Voting: 1 Author Position: A That has weak consensus. End: 11:30 CONSENSUS: Bring a revision of P1905R0 (In-Source Mechanism to Identify Importable Headers), with the guidance below, to the Tooling Study Group.
|
This is ready for an EWGI and Modules Study Group pass. Note that if we don't want this in the International Standard, we still might want to suggest it in the Modules Ecosystem TR. |
The problem that P1905 is attempting to solve is worth solving.
The proper ship vehicle for this is the C++ Standard.
The proper ship vehicle for this is SG15 Ecosystem TR.
// The following polls taken in the context of a SG15 TR
We prefer an attribute spelling to solve the problem from P1905.
EWGI Believes that the Modules Ecosystem TR is the proper ship vehicle, and suggests a #pragma spelling. |
Prague 2020-02 Tooling Minutes P1905R0 In-Source Mechanism to Identify Importable Headers Modules Chair: Ben Boeckel Champion: Corentin Jabot Minute Taker: Gor Nishanov Start Review: 2020-02-14 17:10 Implementation experience: No. POLL: We want to use
Attendance: 15 # of Authors: 1 Author Position: SF CONSENSUS: Weakly in favor. POLL: We want to use
Attendance: 15 # of Authors: 1 Author Position: SF CONSENSUS: In favor. POLL: We want to reject
Attendance: 15 # of Authors: 1 Author Position: SF CONSENSUS: Weakly in favor. Bruno volunteers to coauthor. End: 15:32 CONSENSUS: Bring a revision of P1905R0 (In-Source Mechanism to Identify Importable Headers Modules), with the guidance below, to the Tooling Study Group for further review for the Modules Ecosystem Technical Report.
|
P1905R0 In-Source Mechanism to Identify Importable Headers (Corentin Jabot)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: