From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp001-out.apm-internet.net (smtp001-out.apm-internet.net [85.119.248.222]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E02743894C2A for ; Wed, 7 Dec 2022 16:58:18 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org E02743894C2A Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=sandoe.co.uk Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=sandoe.co.uk Received: (qmail 51729 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2022 16:58:16 -0000 X-APM-Out-ID: 16704322965172 X-APM-Authkey: 257869/1(257869/1) 13 Received: from unknown (HELO smtpclient.apple) (81.138.1.83) by smtp001.apm-internet.net with SMTP; 7 Dec 2022 16:58:16 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3696.120.41.1.1\)) Subject: Re: Naming flag for specifying the output file name for Binary Module Interface files From: Iain Sandoe In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2022 16:58:15 +0000 Cc: Jonathan Wakely , "chuanqi.xcq" , David Blaikie , "ben.boeckel" , Nathan Sidwell Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <96699ff0-f4d7-4276-8af7-5a4ce9735174@acm.org> <6CFAC937-F5FD-49B3-A5E3-4ED83B270DCC@sandoe.co.uk> To: GCC Development X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3696.120.41.1.1) X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,KAM_COUK,KAM_DMARC_STATUS,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE,TXREP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: > On 7 Dec 2022, at 16:52, Nathan Sidwell via Gcc = wrote: >=20 > On 12/7/22 11:18, Iain Sandoe wrote: >=20 >> I think it is reasonable to include c++ in the spelling, since other = languages supported by >> GCC (and clang in due course) have modules. >=20 > I disagree (about the reasonableness part). Other languages have = modules, true, but if they want to name the output file, why not have = the same option spelling? >=20 > I.e. why are we considering: >=20 > $compiler -fc++-module-file=3Dbob foo.cc > $compiler -ffortran-module-file=3Dbob foo.f77 >=20 > The language is being selected implicitly by the file suffix (or = explictly via -X$lang). There's no reason for some other option = controlling an aspect of the compilation to rename the language. We = don't do it for language-specific warning options, and similar. (i.e. = no -f[no-]c++-type-aliasing vs -fc-type-aliasing, nor -Wc++-extra vs = -Wc-extra[*] Fair points. Unfortunately (in case it has not already been mentioned in this thread) = =E2=80=98-fmodule-file=3D=E2=80=98 is already taken and it means an = input, not an output. So, whatever we choose it needs to be distinct = from that. Iain