Repository navigation
[SUGGESTION] Compiletime / runtime separation or constexpr, consteval, template<> sickness. #374
Description
Just to share my idea of constexpr.
C++ has a strict separation between runtime and compiletime. All about compiletime was assisted with <> characters syntax before constexpr.
And I have no idea why constexpr was introduced. It was easier to embrace <expression> with <> to specify that it is strict compile time.
<i>: int defines compile time variable,
i.e. translates to constexpr int i
if <args.cout> == 3 {
p = a&;
}
Forces <expression> to be compile-time, i.e. translates to
if constexpr (args.cout == 3) {
p = a&;
}
Activity
[-][SUGGESTION] constexpr consteval template<> sickness and compiletime / runtime separation.[/-][+][SUGGESTION] Compiletime / runtime separation or constexpr, consteval, template<> sickness.[/+]AbhinavK00 commentedon May 14, 2023
I don't think we need to mark all compile time things with
<>,the<>was probably chosen with generics in mind, it just happened that all generic related work was done at compile time due to zero overhead principlejcanizales commentedon May 17, 2023
I'm a fan of the unified
const {...}proposal of #255