Ben Boeckel

Is that something to fix before 18.0.0 (or during the 18 release cycle)?

Sorry, I was referring to providing the initializer in `libc++.so`, not having it be a no-op function.

> FWIW I also think that this is really a lost opportunity. Build systems already have to compile stuff to get the BMI, and adding a static archive really isn't...

We *can* make BMIs per consumer flag set. It is objects where that is not possible.

So the thing that concerns me is this: - CMake builds this object as a static library - It gets linked from multiple shared libraries (therefore copied) - How is...

[Here's a test case](https://gitlab.kitware.com/ben.boeckel/cmake/-/commit/f54b12f33a0c8a3ad1b75d18c1a042db56687548#e23403b9ef5d7af47ee8175237e6c60afae6290a_0_8) I was able to craft that shows a problem with "consumers must provide the std initializer symbol". The test case is set up as follows: -...

> A real-world case for this would be a library that uses import std internally and exposes a C ABI through headers and extern "C" functions. This means that we'd...

Is there any problem with making them unnameable types though (IIRC, it'd be a new "Voldemort type")? There seem to be lots of issues with making variants types in and...