News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Trying out C++20's modules with Clang and Make. Parent comment

Re:Trying out C++20's modules with Clang and Make by mgaunard on Sunday October 15, 2023 @01:38PM (#37891715)
They were. Gaby has been making presentations at Cppcon about it since 2015. By 2019 it was mostly about teaching people how to use it.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Trying out C++20's modules with Clang and Make by humanrebar on Sunday October 15, 2023 @02:31PM (#37892120)
I'm positive there has been nontrivial work to support C++ modules going into MSVC, msbuild, VS, MS STL, etc., since 2019. And there is still plenty of work to do, for instance helping build systems know when they need to produce more than one IFC for a given module (right now build systems assume modular C++ code is ODR bug free).
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Trying out C++20's modules with Clang and Make by mgaunard on Sunday October 15, 2023 @03:54PM (#37892860)
That sounds like it's mostly integration and tooling.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Trying out C++20's modules with Clang and Make by humanrebar on Sunday October 15, 2023 @04:36PM (#37893186)
Also bug fixes. And there are still major headaches around when names are provided both through textual inclusion and import statements.

But integration and tooling is required for any major amount of adoption. IntelliSense has to work. Existing LSPs have to work.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Trying out C++20's modules with Clang and Make by mgaunard on Monday October 16, 2023 @03:50AM (#37896883)
I personally do not use IDEs, completion or even off-the-shelf build systems. I believe that to be a common situation.
[ Parent | on HN ]