From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ej1-x62c.google.com (mail-ej1-x62c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::62c]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 16601382CE16 for ; Wed, 7 Dec 2022 01:46:11 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 16601382CE16 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Received: by mail-ej1-x62c.google.com with SMTP id bj12so10543702ejb.13 for ; Tue, 06 Dec 2022 17:46:11 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=s9OZDza2OhVU4I0wUxIsgk/MtX15GUfxRoogotUlTCs=; b=VjhQeYXdjQIgS5tTjSJg2m8SsTjKVUhdqGnF2qYdhLGKDyhZHHlCC78Gj+REyK2Vu2 BBLb7YDIOnRakPFSZZA3q/ZSO+UawIOFRFrXFaRqRb0LbYVv7lJKaLFHp8airG1r3lMF +7wWNUKfGyFbm/PoBo/s/AepxQecoEGc7yHt6cgymikJzbPuXwRHLmtcZt9ZiKormL9j BTSh6Ij3WZHWoX1i+8eShP9efe5g0BNbbF34ytMwIh/LYLYihJSAEIlYwZ2C0jBhU2oy Sool8oO4d9ALg8pch9Vh1iQGh42ebCmXnCcyeIlwC8CSX9ruv4lEJ1IRS6uAN/sFD349 g6sA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=s9OZDza2OhVU4I0wUxIsgk/MtX15GUfxRoogotUlTCs=; b=AjnDPiu1Am2PX1zWfMXtELWlaBHV06Kkn6Nx/e74Ggq0PA6F/AazUrUdxIen0psCQ0 R67NwCCwlV3ie/bs7dG+ftBsgoUkxmYuIprgDSAmyX7gtvCNRzWUl6gu0pfVRLRugscW P8qp8LnmLnqCKiy2Qst34P3tkdkQB7VXpvQ0QvbZqkA8o+SueMwyWcqDPVRoGXy/fQ/d i15wVKaG16d6lDhvK5UHtjejmXEugyT/A4W5IpCo0QhYQM8rE85dPwzVN3M0PujQ829Y CRfVnH8/wvt9dwBtHibyMjbdZSPhWpFo5eovfcpVdOkzS4pGcWWzIolRxzlU/NGu/rdB eY8w== X-Gm-Message-State: ANoB5pnmWid5VXbuMOmrFZHq7/tE8CPrtofYdauqpDhMukH87Ef40Vww ZwQEZa66nEI0FTtOLr352WINxRli/XoxRWoErX4= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA0mqf7rhfo+7t3BmYC5if1ngYn+Jmdd0EUzkVwmfUqMlPJogNX9v/2SoIUlS5i183QSZ1xhPrgn7NkCY0R23lfmmBA= X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:518c:b0:7c1:98f:c16a with SMTP id y12-20020a170906518c00b007c1098fc16amr5095910ejk.215.1670377569816; Tue, 06 Dec 2022 17:46:09 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <96699ff0-f4d7-4276-8af7-5a4ce9735174@acm.org> In-Reply-To: <96699ff0-f4d7-4276-8af7-5a4ce9735174@acm.org> From: Jonathan Wakely Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2022 01:45:58 +0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Naming flag for specifying the output file name for Binary Module Interface files To: Nathan Sidwell Cc: David Blaikie , gcc Mailing List , Iain Sandoe , "chuanqi.xcq" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000b0953805ef331595" X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: --000000000000b0953805ef331595 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Wed, 7 Dec 2022, 00:36 Nathan Sidwell via Gcc, wrote: > On 12/6/22 16:03, David Blaikie wrote: > > Over in https://reviews.llvm.org/D137059 we're discussing the naming > > of a clang flag - would be good to have it be consistent with GCC. > > > > The functionality is to name the BMI (.pcm in Clang's parlance) output > > file when compiling a C++20 module. > > > > Current proposal is to use `-fsave-std-cxx-module-file=` which is > > certainly precise, but maybe a bit verbose. Clang has some other flags > > related to modules that skip the std/cxx parts, and are just > > `-fmodule-*` or `-fmodules-*`, so there's some precedent for that too. > > > > Do GCC folks have any veto votes (is the currently proposed name > > especially objectionable/wouldn't be acceptable in GCC) or preferences > > (suggestions to add to the pool)? > > I think the suggested option name is problematic for a number of > additional reasons: > > 1) 'save' -- does it *cause* the bmi to be saved, or is that actually > controlled > by other options? (I suspect the latter) > > 2) 'std' -- why is this there. There's only one C++ std, with different > variants thereof being temporally selectable. > > 3) 'cxx' -- why not 'c++'? Let's not let this transliteration of + to x > get > into the options -- it hasn't in '-std=c++20' for example. > > Might I suggest something more like '-fmodule-output='? That collates > nicely > with other -fmodule-$FOO options, and the 'output' part is similar to the > mnemonic '-o' for the regular output file naming. > That's also much shorter and easier to remember than the five(!) words in the original suggestion. --000000000000b0953805ef331595--