Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[lex.phases] replace term 'input file' with 'source file' in phase 1 #7192

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

AlisdairM
Copy link
Contributor

The only part of the standard that refers to input files is phase 1 of the phases of translation. Everywhere else, we use the term source file, that has a clear definition in the preceding [lex.separate] clarifying that we do not necessarily mean text files in a hosted filing system.

The only part of the standard that refers to input files is
phase 1 of the phases of translation.  Everywhere else, we
use the term source file, that has a clear definition in
the preceding [lex.separate] clarifying that we do not
necessarily mean text files in a hosted filing system.
@jensmaurer jensmaurer added the cwg Issue must be reviewed by CWG. label Jul 30, 2024
@jensmaurer
Copy link
Member

jensmaurer commented Jul 30, 2024

CWG and/or SG16 spent quite some time massaging [lex.phases] p1 into its present form (for the UTF-8 source support); I won't touch that wording editorially.

Maybe "input file" is the subject of phase 1, and "source file" is what's handled in phases 2 and 3. And it's intentional that we only ever talk about the raw sources of translation in phase 1 and nowhere else.

@AlisdairM
Copy link
Contributor Author

I am very happy to defer this to Core, but at the moment "input file" is not a defined term in the standard, and occurs in only this one paragraph. We are very careful to define "source file" as not necessarily implying a file in a filing system, but have no such notion of what "input file" should mean. I believe we need clarity here.

@jensmaurer
Copy link
Member

Where in [lex.separate] do we expressly say we don't imply a "file"? I think we just do so by omission, and "input file" is no better or worse here.

@AlisdairM
Copy link
Contributor Author

I stand corrected. The only reference I can find to "not necessarily a file" is a footnote in [headers], 16.4.2.3, and that applies to headers, not to source files.

@jensmaurer
Copy link
Member

Can we please not do this change, then?

@AlisdairM
Copy link
Contributor Author

I would still like the discussion in Core, because the term "input file" is not defined, unlike the term "source file". If you would prefer to create a core issue and close this PR, I would be content.

@AlisdairM
Copy link
Contributor Author

Late comment: I actually just ran across the note that says source files need not be represented as physical files --- it is a note in phase 7 of translation, so not normative but clarifying what must otherwise be inferred.

@tkoeppe
Copy link
Contributor

tkoeppe commented Oct 17, 2024

Is this a conversation we need to have here, or should this happen in CWG (or on the reflector)?

@AlisdairM
Copy link
Contributor Author

AlisdairM commented Oct 17, 2024

Jens stated that such discussion belongs in Core. I will start a thread there this week, pointing back to this PR.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
cwg Issue must be reviewed by CWG.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants