From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qv1-xf2a.google.com (mail-qv1-xf2a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::f2a]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D09AA383B681 for ; Wed, 7 Dec 2022 16:52:10 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org D09AA383B681 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=acm.org Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Received: by mail-qv1-xf2a.google.com with SMTP id a17so13045810qvt.9 for ; Wed, 07 Dec 2022 08:52:10 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :sender:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=01Ww5ZLeRQuTOpOSfwPBWQAFK1fa1g1iQo0lSRwYo4I=; b=JdHUf31UfNI8TDNZxJZj5PZBs726d+HadwpsdNeaprkw55/uGgxdsAznc7rBhsOm6j s2MnwO218Sq/y6N05C9OFlLt+FgAi8L+f9QdrY4yv9Eqcf0WFxzNNieI5FOaU1XqwpN0 cbn+T7/IKrby2Lb6AX1kfRSu0a6E4EsV+BistxrRqdCD+tVDx8LhXaoHLwJvq3RO6uUx uwrjTooDag/xDGopmxhfEzEMT3vWsTG+IDlDr7U51QVwPXtevYR9hlr76i9HvksajXPa QT8O+QZ9NRxuQX1+/boSIFx3OmiX/DztG3zyd2Qu82kPmApEBMFDM691kx9j+unsFJud GhwA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :sender:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=01Ww5ZLeRQuTOpOSfwPBWQAFK1fa1g1iQo0lSRwYo4I=; b=gIaKCSg7LO6V+zpjz7CMX8n0cSzyCYZ1esdZu/W+aW50xI6soh7T9DByi8Dzp8jJ+c nMM3egETV+IUNkhh7kke0iDSV2XXz4Y4KW/W+PI+48/qzHM8+cV8TwTEas7TbUTULqYG IoXWo6LVsUn4iDB4GKM6XZ1912r17z6PRmSJYEZa+HIC3FSIo4NdAEIvPcLFLks+YJxr cHnDXOS+2JweofG6L8e20o80Vf53pcjH1WJzYormQbh642ys4WLDSiOMD6GUzPv2ctfx Nc54a+EbFMwzh8r99ZWyNUqpwLdaYAl1t5dWhKInE3W5u1zPJF+C2Bwv+5ABV+YKk5rl 6w+Q== X-Gm-Message-State: ANoB5pnwqkl4MvGlFvf8p8w8V83NLqDh44lzoaaz4IC7p79eMEVN0mpd ox/gOr1r6y42UwUpetI5D8s= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA0mqf6UFzlWiwinb5Lwv/yxkrxPlwdPliQoVe6m61FRACG97VWbaBOzvXwV0eKSwTM4fOYTt+gxkQ== X-Received: by 2002:a0c:c24c:0:b0:4c7:5635:3360 with SMTP id w12-20020a0cc24c000000b004c756353360mr1240931qvh.2.1670431930148; Wed, 07 Dec 2022 08:52:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?IPV6:2601:19c:527f:bfd0:cb20:e74:ead7:4cfe? ([2601:19c:527f:bfd0:cb20:e74:ead7:4cfe]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id br8-20020a05620a460800b006faf76e7c9asm17330970qkb.115.2022.12.07.08.52.09 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 07 Dec 2022 08:52:09 -0800 (PST) Sender: Nathan Sidwell Message-ID: Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2022 11:52:09 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.5.0 Subject: Re: Naming flag for specifying the output file name for Binary Module Interface files Content-Language: en-US To: Iain Sandoe , GCC Development Cc: Jonathan Wakely , "chuanqi.xcq" , David Blaikie , Nathan Sidwell , "ben.boeckel" References: <96699ff0-f4d7-4276-8af7-5a4ce9735174@acm.org> <6CFAC937-F5FD-49B3-A5E3-4ED83B270DCC@sandoe.co.uk> From: Nathan Sidwell In-Reply-To: <6CFAC937-F5FD-49B3-A5E3-4ED83B270DCC@sandoe.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3031.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,NICE_REPLY_A,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,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 12/7/22 11:18, Iain Sandoe wrote: > I think it is reasonable to include c++ in the spelling, since other languages supported by > GCC (and clang in due course) have modules. 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? I.e. why are we considering: $compiler -fc++-module-file=bob foo.cc $compiler -ffortran-module-file=bob foo.f77 The language is being selected implicitly by the file suffix (or explictly via -X$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[*] nathan [*] I'll grant there is -Weffective-c++, but that's somewhat out of date now. -- Nathan Sidwell