This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: [c++-concepts] requires expression semantics

From: Jason Merrill <jason at redhat dot com>
To: Andrew Sutton <andrew dot n dot sutton at gmail dot com>
Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at axiomatics dot org>
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2013 20:40:10 -0400
Subject: Re: [c++-concepts] requires expression semantics
References: <CANq5SyvWKM8dm_Qaiu2_UHqXyWU=6tetPrEwhuZH3i+DYd42Xg at mail dot gmail dot com> <51CC7AC4 dot 9070400 at redhat dot com> <CANq5Syt1WC3T8W7t0xEwh1hpzXtxZEcws_pVO5NyXgE17ZFJhw at mail dot gmail dot com>

On 06/27/2013 04:56 PM, Andrew Sutton wrote:

I was not aware of that. That's probably the right, but I remember
having some troubles getting that to work the way I wanted in the
previous implementation. It seemed like I actually had to evaluate the
expression to determine if it was actually constexpr.

Right; an expression is a constant-expression iff it evaluates to aconstant value. Without evaluating the expression we can't catch thingslike division by zero which prevent it from being a constant-expression.


Jason

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [c++-concepts] requires expression semantics
  - From: Andrew Sutton

References:
- [c++-concepts] requires expression semantics
  - From: Andrew Sutton
- Re: [c++-concepts] requires expression semantics
  - From: Jason Merrill
- Re: [c++-concepts] requires expression semantics
  - From: Andrew Sutton

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]