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
> <fortran@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.