From: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely@redhat.com>
To: "Daniel Krügler" <daniel.kruegler@gmail.com>
Cc: libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [committed] libstdc++: Fix constexpr functions in <experimental/internet>
Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2023 15:49:42 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CACb0b4m+VhQzCyp55wkkVv4NfKECJ+CFs-f6T_hC=LbQH66rbQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CACb0b4=yBjCQCaxfHjFJuNcfjnupSR_ZDg5+qQaduADUw-GUKA@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, 31 Mar 2023 at 12:06, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> On Thu, 30 Mar 2023 at 17:01, Daniel Krügler wrote:
> >
> > Am Do., 30. März 2023 um 18:00 Uhr schrieb Jonathan Wakely via
> > Libstdc++ <libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org>:
> > >
> > [..]
> > >
> > > In fact, thinking about P2641 some more, I might revert this change.
> > > Instead of adding an extra bool member to support constexpr, I think
> > > I'll just remove the 'constexpr' keywords from basic_endpoint for now,
> > > and implement it in terms of just inspecting the sa_family_t member of
> > > the union members. And then later, once we have something like P2641,
> > > we can re-add the constexpr keywords and use is_within_lifetime during
> > > constant evaluation. That way we don't add a bool then need to take it
> > > away again, changing the ABI each time.
> >
> > I was just going to make the same suggestion.
>
> Actually, as pointed out in Barry's P2641R1 paper, we can just use
> GCC's __builtin_constant_p:
>
> + constexpr bool
> + _M_is_v6() const noexcept
> + {
> + // For constexpr eval we can just detect which union member is active.
> + // i.e. emulate P2641R1's std::is_active_member(&_M_data._M_v6)).
> + if (std::__is_constant_evaluated())
> + return __builtin_constant_p(_M_data._M_v6.sin6_family);
> + return _M_data._M_v6.sin6_family == AF_INET6;
> + }
Done in commit 10e573e86c6a1ed11df529288ed8fba97f876032
prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-03-31 14:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-03-29 23:40 Jonathan Wakely
2023-03-30 14:44 ` Jonathan Wakely
2023-03-30 15:59 ` Jonathan Wakely
2023-03-30 16:01 ` Daniel Krügler
2023-03-31 11:06 ` Jonathan Wakely
2023-03-31 14:49 ` Jonathan Wakely [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CACb0b4m+VhQzCyp55wkkVv4NfKECJ+CFs-f6T_hC=LbQH66rbQ@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=jwakely@redhat.com \
--cc=daniel.kruegler@gmail.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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).