public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug c++/46382] New: constexpr vs. static_assert in constexpr ctors
@ 2010-11-08 22:08 bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org
2010-11-09 3:54 ` [Bug c++/46382] " jason at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 more replies)
0 siblings, 4 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2010-11-08 22:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46382
Summary: constexpr vs. static_assert in constexpr ctors
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned@gcc.gnu.org
ReportedBy: bkoz@gcc.gnu.org
The current implementation has the nice feature that in addition to a return
statement, a constexpr function can also contain the following:
1) typedefs
2) static_asserts
Both make sense. Hurray! However, this is different for member functions and
so-called "special member functions." In particular, constructors. Here's an
example of something that would be nice if it worked.
---
#include <type_traits>
template<typename _Tp>
struct A
{
int _M_i;
constexpr A(int i) : _M_i(i)
{
#if BUT_WE_WANT_IT_HERE_TOO
static_assert(std::is_fundamental<_Tp>::value, "no"); // not really
#endif
}
constexpr bool notwhatyouwant()
{
typedef _Tp type; // ok
static_assert(std::is_fundamental<_Tp>::value, "no"); // ok
return _M_i == 0;
}
};
int main()
{
constexpr A<int> obj(5);
constexpr bool b = obj.notwhatyouwant();
return 0;
}
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/46382] constexpr vs. static_assert in constexpr ctors
2010-11-08 22:08 [Bug c++/46382] New: constexpr vs. static_assert in constexpr ctors bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2010-11-09 3:54 ` jason at gcc dot gnu.org
2010-11-09 10:14 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
3 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: jason at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2010-11-09 3:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46382
--- Comment #1 from Jason Merrill <jason at gcc dot gnu.org> 2010-11-09 03:54:29 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Tue Nov 9 03:54:24 2010
New Revision: 166471
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=166471
Log:
PR c++/46382
* semantics.c (check_constexpr_ctor_body): New fn.
* parser.c (cp_parser_ctor_initializer_opt_and_function_body): Call it.
* cp-tree.h: Declare it.
Added:
trunk/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/constexpr-sassert.C
Modified:
trunk/gcc/cp/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/cp/cp-tree.h
trunk/gcc/cp/parser.c
trunk/gcc/cp/semantics.c
trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/46382] constexpr vs. static_assert in constexpr ctors
2010-11-08 22:08 [Bug c++/46382] New: constexpr vs. static_assert in constexpr ctors bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org
2010-11-09 3:54 ` [Bug c++/46382] " jason at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2010-11-09 10:14 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2010-11-09 13:46 ` jason at gcc dot gnu.org
2010-11-09 15:47 ` bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org
3 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: redi at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2010-11-09 10:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46382
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> 2010-11-09 10:14:02 UTC ---
Thanks very much, Jason. I'll make use of this in the library today.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/46382] constexpr vs. static_assert in constexpr ctors
2010-11-08 22:08 [Bug c++/46382] New: constexpr vs. static_assert in constexpr ctors bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org
2010-11-09 3:54 ` [Bug c++/46382] " jason at gcc dot gnu.org
2010-11-09 10:14 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2010-11-09 13:46 ` jason at gcc dot gnu.org
2010-11-09 15:47 ` bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org
3 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: jason at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2010-11-09 13:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46382
Jason Merrill <jason at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution| |FIXED
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill <jason at gcc dot gnu.org> 2010-11-09 13:46:09 UTC ---
Done.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/46382] constexpr vs. static_assert in constexpr ctors
2010-11-08 22:08 [Bug c++/46382] New: constexpr vs. static_assert in constexpr ctors bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2010-11-09 13:46 ` jason at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2010-11-09 15:47 ` bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org
3 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2010-11-09 15:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46382
--- Comment #4 from Benjamin Kosnik <bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org> 2010-11-09 15:47:23 UTC ---
Nice! Thanks.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2010-11-09 15:47 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2010-11-08 22:08 [Bug c++/46382] New: constexpr vs. static_assert in constexpr ctors bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org
2010-11-09 3:54 ` [Bug c++/46382] " jason at gcc dot gnu.org
2010-11-09 10:14 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2010-11-09 13:46 ` jason at gcc dot gnu.org
2010-11-09 15:47 ` bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).