[v3] constexpr tuple
Daniel Krügler
daniel.kruegler@googlemail.com
Wed Sep 7 07:23:00 GMT 2011
2011/9/7 Benjamin Kosnik <bkoz@redhat.com>:
>
> Here's the tuple additions for constexpr now that it's ok to return
> this.
Btw.: I would have expected that you can make
__tuple_compare<>::__eq/__less also constexpr.
These are static functions, thus __tuple_compare
itself need not to be a literal type (Disclaimer: I did
not check all __tuple_compare specializations).
> Is tuple_cat now considered conforming?
No, see:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50159
> If so, certain signatures can be constexpr.
Yes.
- Daniel
More information about the Gcc-patches
mailing list