在 C++20 模块中打破循环依赖的前向声明不起作用

Question

I've been banging my head on this problem for days, I read a lot of documentation and posts about new C++20 modules among which this official one , this one and this other one on Stackoverflow , but I really cannot solve this problem.

I'm using MSVC compiler delivered with Visual Studio Preview 16.6.0 2.0 . I know it is not a stable release yet, but I'd like to mess around with new features to start learning them.

Basically I wrote a module ( myModule ) and 2 partitions of this module ( mySubmodule1 and mySubmodule2 ) and I implemented them in two module implementation files ( mySubmodule1Impl.cpp and mySubmodule2Impl.cpp ).

mySubmodule1 have a dependency on mySubmodule2 , and vice-versa. Here is the source:

mySubmodule1.ixx

export module myModule:mySubmodule1;

export namespace myNamespace{

class MyClass2;

class MyClass1{
    public:
    int foo(MyClass2& c);
    int x = 9;
};
}

mySubmodule2.ixx

export module myModule:mySubmodule2;
import :mySubmodule1;

export namespace myNamespace{

class MyClass2 {
    public:
    MyClass2(MyClass1 x);
    int x = 14;
    MyClass1 c;
};
}

mySubmodule1Impl.cpp

module myModule:mySubmodule1;
import :mySubmodule2;

int myNamespace::MyClass1::foo(myNamespace::MyClass2& c) {
    this->x = c.x-14;
    return x;
}

mySubmodule2Impl.cpp

module myModule:mySubmodule2;
import :mySubmodule1;

myNamespace::MyClass2::MyClass2(myNamespace::MyClass1 c) {
    this->x = c.x + 419;
}

myModule.ixx

export module myModule;

export import :mySubmodule1;
export import :mySubmodule2;

As you can see I can forward declare MyClass2 in mySubmodule1 , but I cannot forward declare MyClass1 in mySubmodule2 , because in MyClass2 I use a concrete object of type MyClass1 .

I compile with this line: cl /EHsc /experimental:module /std:c++latest mySubmodule1.ixx mySubmodule2.ixx myModule.ixx mySubmodule1Impl.cpp mySubmodule2Impl.cpp Source.cpp where Source.cpp is just the main.

I get the infamous error C2027: use of undefined type 'myNamespace::MyClass2' in mySubmodule1Impl.cpp and mySubmodule2Impl.cpp at the lines where I use MyClass2 . Moreover the compiler tells me to look at the declaration of MyClass2 in mySubmodule1.ixx where there is the forward declaration.

Now, I really do not understand where is my mistake. I checked over and over but the logic of the program seems perfect to me. The order of compilation of the files should define MyClass2 before it is even used in the implementation!

I tried to compile this exact program using the "old" .h and .cpp files instead of modules, and it compiles and run fine. So I guess I'm missing something regarding these new modules.

I checked on the first official proposal of modules (paragraph 10.7.5) , and in the first one there was a construct named proclaimed ownership declaration which seemed to be perfect in such cases. Basically it allows you to import an entity owned by another module in the current module, but without importing the module itself. But in later revisions of the proposal there is no sign of it. Abslolutely nothing. And in the "changelog" section of the new proposal it isn't even cited.

Please don't tell me cyclic dependencies are bad. I know often they are bad, but not always. And even if you think they are always bad I'm not asking for a rule of the thumb. I'm asking why my code compiles with "old" .h + .cpp but not with new modules. Why the linker doesn't see the definition of MyClass2 .

---

EDIT 1

Here is the new design suggested in the answer, but it still doesn't work. I get the exact same errors:

mySubmodule1Impl.cpp

module myModule;

int myNamespace::MyClass1::foo(myNamespace::MyClass2& c) {
    this->x = c.x-14;
    return x;
}

mySubmodule2Impl.cpp

module myModule;

myNamespace::MyClass2::MyClass2(myNamespace::MyClass1 c) {
    this->x = c.x + 419;
}

All of the other files are unchanged.

Answer 1

The immediate problem is that you can't have an “interface file” and an “implementation file” for a single module partition (as if it were a header file and source file pair). There are interface partitions and implementation partitions, but each must have its own name because each exists to be imported . Of course, it is also one of the purposes of modules to allow a single file where header/source pairs were needed: you can often include the implementation in the same file as the interface file but use export and/or inline only with the latter. This does come with the usual header-only downside of causing more frequent downstream rebuilds.

The metaproblem is that there is no circularity here: you've already addressed it with the forward declaration of MyClass2 . That's the right thing to do: modules don't change the basic semantics of C++, so such techniques remain applicable and necessary. You can still divide the classes into two files for the usual organizational reasons, but there's no need for the method definitions to be in partitions at all (nor in separate module myModule; implementation units, which automatically import all of the interface). The import :mySubmodule1 that remains (in the interface partition mySubmodule2 ) is then unambiguous and correct.

As for proclaimed-ownership-declaration s, they appeared in the Modules TS that didn't have module partitions, such that cases like this could not be handled otherwise (since you can use a normal forward declaration for an entity from another partition but not another module ).

Answer 2

Try exporting the forward declarations. eg

// A.cc

export module Cyclic:A;

export class B;
export class A {
public:
    char name() { return 'A'; }
    void f(B& b);
};

// B.cc

export module Cyclic:B;

export class A;
export class B {
public:
    char name() { return 'B'; }
    void f(A& a);
};

// A_impl.cc

module Cyclic;

import Cyclic:A;
import Cyclic:B;

import <iostream>;

void A::f(B& b) {
  std::cout << name() << " calling " << b.name() << std::endl;
}

// B_impl.cc

module Cyclic;

import Cyclic:B;
import Cyclic:A;

import <iostream>;

void B::f(A& a) {
  std::cout << name() << " calling " << a.name() << std::endl;
}

// Cyclic.cc

export module Cyclic;
export import :A;
export import :B;

Answer 3

See my answer to this post . You probably need to export your forward declaration to have external rather than module linkage for MyClass2 .

Answer 4

In addition: very helpful in depth answer. The helpfulness can not be overstated.

Answer 5

Sure. If I could have had the ability to directly reply to posts, the answer makes more sense in context. The link above is meant as post-reponse to Touloudou's last answer with additional references. That solution: export forward declarations from partitions (optionally separating exports into their own partition).

Additionally, at the time that site post was written, cross references across modules were prohibited and gcc support was lagging, which could explain the problems and possible misdirection encountered from other earlier answers, at the time.