[lex.separate][module.unit] move definitions of program and translation unit #7180
Conversation
|
Just to confirm that I looked at every reference for program and translation unit to see if they had a cross reference that should be updated. These terms occur quite frequently, but rarely have a cross-reference, and in those places that do have a cross reference, they are frequently cross referencing a concept in the whole sentence rather than a definition of either term. |
AlisdairM
force-pushed
the
move_definition_of_program
branch
2 times, most recently
from
86d979a to
413da6a
Compare
|
Note to CWG chair: this PR, if accepted, would seem to be making progress towards resolving http://wg21.link/cwg2670. |
wg21bot
added
the
needs rebase
AlisdairM
force-pushed
the
move_definition_of_program
branch
from
413da6a to
be3e611
Compare
AlisdairM
force-pushed
the
move_definition_of_program
branch
2 times, most recently
from
ed14973 to
6b5b3b1
Compare
jensmaurer
removed
the
needs rebase
source/modules.tex
Outdated
| \nontermdef{translation-unit}\br | ||
| \opt{declaration-seq}\br | ||
| \opt{global-module-fragment} module-declaration \opt{declaration-seq} \opt{private-module-fragment} | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
A translation-unit is not necessarily a module unit, so I find this new place not good. I agree having this production in [lex] is not good, either, because this is a phase 7 grammar production. I agree that [basic.link] isn't a great place, so it's either [basic.pre] or a new subclause [basic.program].
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looking again, I think the best location is to introduce [basic.def]. What you you think?
…on unit The definition of program at the top of [basic.link] should move to the front of [lex.separate] so that it is defined before its first usage, and also clarifies that is what the phases of translation produce. Similarly, move the definition of the grammar production translation-unit to the top of the only clause whose grammar actually uses it, [module.unit]. Finally, retitle [basic.link] as just Linkage, rather than Programs and linkage.
AlisdairM
force-pushed
the
move_definition_of_program
branch
from
6b5b3b1 to
3f83595
Compare
The definition of program at the top of [basic.link] should move to the front of [lex.separate] so that it is defined before its first usage, and also clarifies what the phases of translation produce.
The description of translation unit in [basic.link] is provided only to support the definition of program. However, that description is no longer useful now that the term has a definition in [lex.phases]. The description is also never referenced In the rest of [basic.link]. If we remove that description, then there is nothing tying the definition of the grammar term translation-unit to [basic.link] either, so move it to the place where that definition is most useful, at the top of [module.unit]. It is tempting to move the grammar definitions of global-module-framgment and private-module-framgment to the collected grammar at the top of this clause two, but leaving them in their current subclauses for now, pending further feedack.
Finally, retitle [basic.link] as just Linkage, rather than Programs and linkage, as the subclause was never about the terms described in the opening paragraph and never mention again (within this clause).