C++ check if statement can be evaluated constexpr












16















Is there a method to decide whether something can be constexpr evaluated, and use the result as a constexpr boolean? My simplified use case is as follows:



template <typename base>
class derived
{
template<size_t size>
void do_stuff() { (...) }

void do_stuff(size_t size) { (...) }
public:
void execute()
{
if constexpr(is_constexpr(base::get_data())
{
do_stuff<base::get_data()>();
}
else
{
do_stuff(base::get_data());
}
}
}


My target is C++2a.



I found the following reddit thread, but I'm not a big fan of the macros. https://www.reddit.com/r/cpp/comments/7c208c/is_constexpr_a_macro_that_check_if_an_expression/










share|improve this question




















  • 1





    Hmm, the body of a if constexpr will only be evaluated if the expression in the if constexpr is true at compile time. Is that what you are looking for?

    – Jesper Juhl
    Mar 21 at 20:13






  • 1





    But what if the test in the if constexpr([test]) is not evaluatable at compile time?

    – Aart Stuurman
    Mar 21 at 20:17






  • 8





    Maybe you can do something with std::is_constant_evaluated?

    – 0x5453
    Mar 21 at 20:18











  • en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/if

    – Jesper Juhl
    Mar 21 at 20:18






  • 2





    @AartStuurman: What is do_stuff that it can run at compile time or runtime, but itself should not be constexpr? Wouldn't it make more sense to just make it a constexpr function, and pass it the value of get_data as a parameter?

    – Nicol Bolas
    Mar 21 at 20:38
















16















Is there a method to decide whether something can be constexpr evaluated, and use the result as a constexpr boolean? My simplified use case is as follows:



template <typename base>
class derived
{
template<size_t size>
void do_stuff() { (...) }

void do_stuff(size_t size) { (...) }
public:
void execute()
{
if constexpr(is_constexpr(base::get_data())
{
do_stuff<base::get_data()>();
}
else
{
do_stuff(base::get_data());
}
}
}


My target is C++2a.



I found the following reddit thread, but I'm not a big fan of the macros. https://www.reddit.com/r/cpp/comments/7c208c/is_constexpr_a_macro_that_check_if_an_expression/










share|improve this question




















  • 1





    Hmm, the body of a if constexpr will only be evaluated if the expression in the if constexpr is true at compile time. Is that what you are looking for?

    – Jesper Juhl
    Mar 21 at 20:13






  • 1





    But what if the test in the if constexpr([test]) is not evaluatable at compile time?

    – Aart Stuurman
    Mar 21 at 20:17






  • 8





    Maybe you can do something with std::is_constant_evaluated?

    – 0x5453
    Mar 21 at 20:18











  • en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/if

    – Jesper Juhl
    Mar 21 at 20:18






  • 2





    @AartStuurman: What is do_stuff that it can run at compile time or runtime, but itself should not be constexpr? Wouldn't it make more sense to just make it a constexpr function, and pass it the value of get_data as a parameter?

    – Nicol Bolas
    Mar 21 at 20:38














16












16








16


10






Is there a method to decide whether something can be constexpr evaluated, and use the result as a constexpr boolean? My simplified use case is as follows:



template <typename base>
class derived
{
template<size_t size>
void do_stuff() { (...) }

void do_stuff(size_t size) { (...) }
public:
void execute()
{
if constexpr(is_constexpr(base::get_data())
{
do_stuff<base::get_data()>();
}
else
{
do_stuff(base::get_data());
}
}
}


My target is C++2a.



I found the following reddit thread, but I'm not a big fan of the macros. https://www.reddit.com/r/cpp/comments/7c208c/is_constexpr_a_macro_that_check_if_an_expression/










share|improve this question
















Is there a method to decide whether something can be constexpr evaluated, and use the result as a constexpr boolean? My simplified use case is as follows:



template <typename base>
class derived
{
template<size_t size>
void do_stuff() { (...) }

void do_stuff(size_t size) { (...) }
public:
void execute()
{
if constexpr(is_constexpr(base::get_data())
{
do_stuff<base::get_data()>();
}
else
{
do_stuff(base::get_data());
}
}
}


My target is C++2a.



I found the following reddit thread, but I'm not a big fan of the macros. https://www.reddit.com/r/cpp/comments/7c208c/is_constexpr_a_macro_that_check_if_an_expression/







c++ template-meta-programming constexpr c++20 if-constexpr






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Mar 22 at 14:35









max66

38.7k74473




38.7k74473










asked Mar 21 at 20:10









Aart StuurmanAart Stuurman

1,033827




1,033827








  • 1





    Hmm, the body of a if constexpr will only be evaluated if the expression in the if constexpr is true at compile time. Is that what you are looking for?

    – Jesper Juhl
    Mar 21 at 20:13






  • 1





    But what if the test in the if constexpr([test]) is not evaluatable at compile time?

    – Aart Stuurman
    Mar 21 at 20:17






  • 8





    Maybe you can do something with std::is_constant_evaluated?

    – 0x5453
    Mar 21 at 20:18











  • en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/if

    – Jesper Juhl
    Mar 21 at 20:18






  • 2





    @AartStuurman: What is do_stuff that it can run at compile time or runtime, but itself should not be constexpr? Wouldn't it make more sense to just make it a constexpr function, and pass it the value of get_data as a parameter?

    – Nicol Bolas
    Mar 21 at 20:38














  • 1





    Hmm, the body of a if constexpr will only be evaluated if the expression in the if constexpr is true at compile time. Is that what you are looking for?

    – Jesper Juhl
    Mar 21 at 20:13






  • 1





    But what if the test in the if constexpr([test]) is not evaluatable at compile time?

    – Aart Stuurman
    Mar 21 at 20:17






  • 8





    Maybe you can do something with std::is_constant_evaluated?

    – 0x5453
    Mar 21 at 20:18











  • en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/if

    – Jesper Juhl
    Mar 21 at 20:18






  • 2





    @AartStuurman: What is do_stuff that it can run at compile time or runtime, but itself should not be constexpr? Wouldn't it make more sense to just make it a constexpr function, and pass it the value of get_data as a parameter?

    – Nicol Bolas
    Mar 21 at 20:38








1




1





Hmm, the body of a if constexpr will only be evaluated if the expression in the if constexpr is true at compile time. Is that what you are looking for?

– Jesper Juhl
Mar 21 at 20:13





Hmm, the body of a if constexpr will only be evaluated if the expression in the if constexpr is true at compile time. Is that what you are looking for?

– Jesper Juhl
Mar 21 at 20:13




1




1





But what if the test in the if constexpr([test]) is not evaluatable at compile time?

– Aart Stuurman
Mar 21 at 20:17





But what if the test in the if constexpr([test]) is not evaluatable at compile time?

– Aart Stuurman
Mar 21 at 20:17




8




8





Maybe you can do something with std::is_constant_evaluated?

– 0x5453
Mar 21 at 20:18





Maybe you can do something with std::is_constant_evaluated?

– 0x5453
Mar 21 at 20:18













en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/if

– Jesper Juhl
Mar 21 at 20:18





en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/if

– Jesper Juhl
Mar 21 at 20:18




2




2





@AartStuurman: What is do_stuff that it can run at compile time or runtime, but itself should not be constexpr? Wouldn't it make more sense to just make it a constexpr function, and pass it the value of get_data as a parameter?

– Nicol Bolas
Mar 21 at 20:38





@AartStuurman: What is do_stuff that it can run at compile time or runtime, but itself should not be constexpr? Wouldn't it make more sense to just make it a constexpr function, and pass it the value of get_data as a parameter?

– Nicol Bolas
Mar 21 at 20:38












3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes


















16














Here's another solution, which is more generic (applicable to any expression, without defining a separate template each time).



This solution leverages that (1) lambda expressions can be constexpr as of C++17 (2) the type of a captureless lambda is default constructible as of C++20.



The idea is, the overload that returns true is selected when and only when Lambda{}() can appear within a template argument, which effectively requires the lambda invocation to be a constant expression.



template<class Lambda, int=(Lambda{}(), 0)>
constexpr bool is_constexpr(Lambda) { return true; }
constexpr bool is_constexpr(...) { return false; }

template <typename base>
class derived
{
// ...

void execute()
{
if constexpr(is_constexpr({ base::get_data(); }))
do_stuff<base::get_data()>();
else
do_stuff(base::get_data());
}
}





share|improve this answer


























  • Intriguing solution... this way you get the same result of my custom type traits but more synthetically and, above all, the exact expression verified (base::get_data()) is embedded in the argument and not hard-coded as in my solution. Very nice. I have to remember it.

    – max66
    Mar 22 at 0:24













  • I am accepting this, because it is an answer to the a generic case of the question. max66 answer is also very useful(in non-c++2a cases), but requires repetition for every usage :)

    – Aart Stuurman
    Mar 22 at 9:42



















10














Not exactly what you asked (I've developer a custom type trait specific for a get_value() static method... maybe it's possible to generalize it but, at the moment, I don't know how) but I suppose you can use SFINAE and make something as follows



#include <iostream>
#include <type_traits>

template <typename T>
constexpr auto icee_helper (int)
-> decltype( std::integral_constant<decltype(T::get_data()), T::get_data()>{},
std::true_type{} );

template <typename>
constexpr auto icee_helper (long)
-> std::false_type;

template <typename T>
using isConstExprEval = decltype(icee_helper<T>(0));

template <typename base>
struct derived
{
template <std::size_t I>
void do_stuff()
{ std::cout << "constexpr case (" << I << ')' << std::endl; }

void do_stuff (std::size_t i)
{ std::cout << "not constexpr case (" << i << ')' << std::endl; }

void execute ()
{
if constexpr ( isConstExprEval<base>::value )
do_stuff<base::get_data()>();
else
do_stuff(base::get_data());
}
};

struct foo
{ static constexpr std::size_t get_data () { return 1u; } };

struct bar
{ static std::size_t get_data () { return 2u; } };

int main ()
{
derived<foo>{}.execute(); // print "constexpr case (1)"
derived<bar>{}.execute(); // print "not constexpr case (2)"
}





share|improve this answer





















  • 4





    This is madness, this use of the comma operator, the long/int overload... Have an upvote. :/

    – matovitch
    Mar 21 at 21:13











  • @matovitch - never underestimate the power of the comma operator }:‑)

    – max66
    Mar 21 at 21:16











  • Will this work on platforms where sizeof(long) is equal to sizeof(int)?

    – Gregory Nisbet
    Mar 22 at 3:35






  • 2





    @GregoryNisbet - Yes. Because, for the language so for the compiler, they remain different types.

    – max66
    Mar 22 at 8:08



















7














template<auto> struct require_constant;
template<class T>
concept has_constexpr_data = requires { typename require_constant<T::get_data()>; };


This is basically what's used by std::ranges::split_view.






share|improve this answer
























    Your Answer






    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
    StackExchange.snippets.init();
    });
    });
    }, "code-snippets");

    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "1"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });














    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f55288555%2fc-check-if-statement-can-be-evaluated-constexpr%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    3 Answers
    3






    active

    oldest

    votes








    3 Answers
    3






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    16














    Here's another solution, which is more generic (applicable to any expression, without defining a separate template each time).



    This solution leverages that (1) lambda expressions can be constexpr as of C++17 (2) the type of a captureless lambda is default constructible as of C++20.



    The idea is, the overload that returns true is selected when and only when Lambda{}() can appear within a template argument, which effectively requires the lambda invocation to be a constant expression.



    template<class Lambda, int=(Lambda{}(), 0)>
    constexpr bool is_constexpr(Lambda) { return true; }
    constexpr bool is_constexpr(...) { return false; }

    template <typename base>
    class derived
    {
    // ...

    void execute()
    {
    if constexpr(is_constexpr({ base::get_data(); }))
    do_stuff<base::get_data()>();
    else
    do_stuff(base::get_data());
    }
    }





    share|improve this answer


























    • Intriguing solution... this way you get the same result of my custom type traits but more synthetically and, above all, the exact expression verified (base::get_data()) is embedded in the argument and not hard-coded as in my solution. Very nice. I have to remember it.

      – max66
      Mar 22 at 0:24













    • I am accepting this, because it is an answer to the a generic case of the question. max66 answer is also very useful(in non-c++2a cases), but requires repetition for every usage :)

      – Aart Stuurman
      Mar 22 at 9:42
















    16














    Here's another solution, which is more generic (applicable to any expression, without defining a separate template each time).



    This solution leverages that (1) lambda expressions can be constexpr as of C++17 (2) the type of a captureless lambda is default constructible as of C++20.



    The idea is, the overload that returns true is selected when and only when Lambda{}() can appear within a template argument, which effectively requires the lambda invocation to be a constant expression.



    template<class Lambda, int=(Lambda{}(), 0)>
    constexpr bool is_constexpr(Lambda) { return true; }
    constexpr bool is_constexpr(...) { return false; }

    template <typename base>
    class derived
    {
    // ...

    void execute()
    {
    if constexpr(is_constexpr({ base::get_data(); }))
    do_stuff<base::get_data()>();
    else
    do_stuff(base::get_data());
    }
    }





    share|improve this answer


























    • Intriguing solution... this way you get the same result of my custom type traits but more synthetically and, above all, the exact expression verified (base::get_data()) is embedded in the argument and not hard-coded as in my solution. Very nice. I have to remember it.

      – max66
      Mar 22 at 0:24













    • I am accepting this, because it is an answer to the a generic case of the question. max66 answer is also very useful(in non-c++2a cases), but requires repetition for every usage :)

      – Aart Stuurman
      Mar 22 at 9:42














    16












    16








    16







    Here's another solution, which is more generic (applicable to any expression, without defining a separate template each time).



    This solution leverages that (1) lambda expressions can be constexpr as of C++17 (2) the type of a captureless lambda is default constructible as of C++20.



    The idea is, the overload that returns true is selected when and only when Lambda{}() can appear within a template argument, which effectively requires the lambda invocation to be a constant expression.



    template<class Lambda, int=(Lambda{}(), 0)>
    constexpr bool is_constexpr(Lambda) { return true; }
    constexpr bool is_constexpr(...) { return false; }

    template <typename base>
    class derived
    {
    // ...

    void execute()
    {
    if constexpr(is_constexpr({ base::get_data(); }))
    do_stuff<base::get_data()>();
    else
    do_stuff(base::get_data());
    }
    }





    share|improve this answer















    Here's another solution, which is more generic (applicable to any expression, without defining a separate template each time).



    This solution leverages that (1) lambda expressions can be constexpr as of C++17 (2) the type of a captureless lambda is default constructible as of C++20.



    The idea is, the overload that returns true is selected when and only when Lambda{}() can appear within a template argument, which effectively requires the lambda invocation to be a constant expression.



    template<class Lambda, int=(Lambda{}(), 0)>
    constexpr bool is_constexpr(Lambda) { return true; }
    constexpr bool is_constexpr(...) { return false; }

    template <typename base>
    class derived
    {
    // ...

    void execute()
    {
    if constexpr(is_constexpr({ base::get_data(); }))
    do_stuff<base::get_data()>();
    else
    do_stuff(base::get_data());
    }
    }






    share|improve this answer














    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer








    edited Mar 21 at 23:26

























    answered Mar 21 at 22:46









    cpplearnercpplearner

    5,59222342




    5,59222342













    • Intriguing solution... this way you get the same result of my custom type traits but more synthetically and, above all, the exact expression verified (base::get_data()) is embedded in the argument and not hard-coded as in my solution. Very nice. I have to remember it.

      – max66
      Mar 22 at 0:24













    • I am accepting this, because it is an answer to the a generic case of the question. max66 answer is also very useful(in non-c++2a cases), but requires repetition for every usage :)

      – Aart Stuurman
      Mar 22 at 9:42



















    • Intriguing solution... this way you get the same result of my custom type traits but more synthetically and, above all, the exact expression verified (base::get_data()) is embedded in the argument and not hard-coded as in my solution. Very nice. I have to remember it.

      – max66
      Mar 22 at 0:24













    • I am accepting this, because it is an answer to the a generic case of the question. max66 answer is also very useful(in non-c++2a cases), but requires repetition for every usage :)

      – Aart Stuurman
      Mar 22 at 9:42

















    Intriguing solution... this way you get the same result of my custom type traits but more synthetically and, above all, the exact expression verified (base::get_data()) is embedded in the argument and not hard-coded as in my solution. Very nice. I have to remember it.

    – max66
    Mar 22 at 0:24







    Intriguing solution... this way you get the same result of my custom type traits but more synthetically and, above all, the exact expression verified (base::get_data()) is embedded in the argument and not hard-coded as in my solution. Very nice. I have to remember it.

    – max66
    Mar 22 at 0:24















    I am accepting this, because it is an answer to the a generic case of the question. max66 answer is also very useful(in non-c++2a cases), but requires repetition for every usage :)

    – Aart Stuurman
    Mar 22 at 9:42





    I am accepting this, because it is an answer to the a generic case of the question. max66 answer is also very useful(in non-c++2a cases), but requires repetition for every usage :)

    – Aart Stuurman
    Mar 22 at 9:42













    10














    Not exactly what you asked (I've developer a custom type trait specific for a get_value() static method... maybe it's possible to generalize it but, at the moment, I don't know how) but I suppose you can use SFINAE and make something as follows



    #include <iostream>
    #include <type_traits>

    template <typename T>
    constexpr auto icee_helper (int)
    -> decltype( std::integral_constant<decltype(T::get_data()), T::get_data()>{},
    std::true_type{} );

    template <typename>
    constexpr auto icee_helper (long)
    -> std::false_type;

    template <typename T>
    using isConstExprEval = decltype(icee_helper<T>(0));

    template <typename base>
    struct derived
    {
    template <std::size_t I>
    void do_stuff()
    { std::cout << "constexpr case (" << I << ')' << std::endl; }

    void do_stuff (std::size_t i)
    { std::cout << "not constexpr case (" << i << ')' << std::endl; }

    void execute ()
    {
    if constexpr ( isConstExprEval<base>::value )
    do_stuff<base::get_data()>();
    else
    do_stuff(base::get_data());
    }
    };

    struct foo
    { static constexpr std::size_t get_data () { return 1u; } };

    struct bar
    { static std::size_t get_data () { return 2u; } };

    int main ()
    {
    derived<foo>{}.execute(); // print "constexpr case (1)"
    derived<bar>{}.execute(); // print "not constexpr case (2)"
    }





    share|improve this answer





















    • 4





      This is madness, this use of the comma operator, the long/int overload... Have an upvote. :/

      – matovitch
      Mar 21 at 21:13











    • @matovitch - never underestimate the power of the comma operator }:‑)

      – max66
      Mar 21 at 21:16











    • Will this work on platforms where sizeof(long) is equal to sizeof(int)?

      – Gregory Nisbet
      Mar 22 at 3:35






    • 2





      @GregoryNisbet - Yes. Because, for the language so for the compiler, they remain different types.

      – max66
      Mar 22 at 8:08
















    10














    Not exactly what you asked (I've developer a custom type trait specific for a get_value() static method... maybe it's possible to generalize it but, at the moment, I don't know how) but I suppose you can use SFINAE and make something as follows



    #include <iostream>
    #include <type_traits>

    template <typename T>
    constexpr auto icee_helper (int)
    -> decltype( std::integral_constant<decltype(T::get_data()), T::get_data()>{},
    std::true_type{} );

    template <typename>
    constexpr auto icee_helper (long)
    -> std::false_type;

    template <typename T>
    using isConstExprEval = decltype(icee_helper<T>(0));

    template <typename base>
    struct derived
    {
    template <std::size_t I>
    void do_stuff()
    { std::cout << "constexpr case (" << I << ')' << std::endl; }

    void do_stuff (std::size_t i)
    { std::cout << "not constexpr case (" << i << ')' << std::endl; }

    void execute ()
    {
    if constexpr ( isConstExprEval<base>::value )
    do_stuff<base::get_data()>();
    else
    do_stuff(base::get_data());
    }
    };

    struct foo
    { static constexpr std::size_t get_data () { return 1u; } };

    struct bar
    { static std::size_t get_data () { return 2u; } };

    int main ()
    {
    derived<foo>{}.execute(); // print "constexpr case (1)"
    derived<bar>{}.execute(); // print "not constexpr case (2)"
    }





    share|improve this answer





















    • 4





      This is madness, this use of the comma operator, the long/int overload... Have an upvote. :/

      – matovitch
      Mar 21 at 21:13











    • @matovitch - never underestimate the power of the comma operator }:‑)

      – max66
      Mar 21 at 21:16











    • Will this work on platforms where sizeof(long) is equal to sizeof(int)?

      – Gregory Nisbet
      Mar 22 at 3:35






    • 2





      @GregoryNisbet - Yes. Because, for the language so for the compiler, they remain different types.

      – max66
      Mar 22 at 8:08














    10












    10








    10







    Not exactly what you asked (I've developer a custom type trait specific for a get_value() static method... maybe it's possible to generalize it but, at the moment, I don't know how) but I suppose you can use SFINAE and make something as follows



    #include <iostream>
    #include <type_traits>

    template <typename T>
    constexpr auto icee_helper (int)
    -> decltype( std::integral_constant<decltype(T::get_data()), T::get_data()>{},
    std::true_type{} );

    template <typename>
    constexpr auto icee_helper (long)
    -> std::false_type;

    template <typename T>
    using isConstExprEval = decltype(icee_helper<T>(0));

    template <typename base>
    struct derived
    {
    template <std::size_t I>
    void do_stuff()
    { std::cout << "constexpr case (" << I << ')' << std::endl; }

    void do_stuff (std::size_t i)
    { std::cout << "not constexpr case (" << i << ')' << std::endl; }

    void execute ()
    {
    if constexpr ( isConstExprEval<base>::value )
    do_stuff<base::get_data()>();
    else
    do_stuff(base::get_data());
    }
    };

    struct foo
    { static constexpr std::size_t get_data () { return 1u; } };

    struct bar
    { static std::size_t get_data () { return 2u; } };

    int main ()
    {
    derived<foo>{}.execute(); // print "constexpr case (1)"
    derived<bar>{}.execute(); // print "not constexpr case (2)"
    }





    share|improve this answer















    Not exactly what you asked (I've developer a custom type trait specific for a get_value() static method... maybe it's possible to generalize it but, at the moment, I don't know how) but I suppose you can use SFINAE and make something as follows



    #include <iostream>
    #include <type_traits>

    template <typename T>
    constexpr auto icee_helper (int)
    -> decltype( std::integral_constant<decltype(T::get_data()), T::get_data()>{},
    std::true_type{} );

    template <typename>
    constexpr auto icee_helper (long)
    -> std::false_type;

    template <typename T>
    using isConstExprEval = decltype(icee_helper<T>(0));

    template <typename base>
    struct derived
    {
    template <std::size_t I>
    void do_stuff()
    { std::cout << "constexpr case (" << I << ')' << std::endl; }

    void do_stuff (std::size_t i)
    { std::cout << "not constexpr case (" << i << ')' << std::endl; }

    void execute ()
    {
    if constexpr ( isConstExprEval<base>::value )
    do_stuff<base::get_data()>();
    else
    do_stuff(base::get_data());
    }
    };

    struct foo
    { static constexpr std::size_t get_data () { return 1u; } };

    struct bar
    { static std::size_t get_data () { return 2u; } };

    int main ()
    {
    derived<foo>{}.execute(); // print "constexpr case (1)"
    derived<bar>{}.execute(); // print "not constexpr case (2)"
    }






    share|improve this answer














    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer








    edited Mar 21 at 21:07

























    answered Mar 21 at 21:01









    max66max66

    38.7k74473




    38.7k74473








    • 4





      This is madness, this use of the comma operator, the long/int overload... Have an upvote. :/

      – matovitch
      Mar 21 at 21:13











    • @matovitch - never underestimate the power of the comma operator }:‑)

      – max66
      Mar 21 at 21:16











    • Will this work on platforms where sizeof(long) is equal to sizeof(int)?

      – Gregory Nisbet
      Mar 22 at 3:35






    • 2





      @GregoryNisbet - Yes. Because, for the language so for the compiler, they remain different types.

      – max66
      Mar 22 at 8:08














    • 4





      This is madness, this use of the comma operator, the long/int overload... Have an upvote. :/

      – matovitch
      Mar 21 at 21:13











    • @matovitch - never underestimate the power of the comma operator }:‑)

      – max66
      Mar 21 at 21:16











    • Will this work on platforms where sizeof(long) is equal to sizeof(int)?

      – Gregory Nisbet
      Mar 22 at 3:35






    • 2





      @GregoryNisbet - Yes. Because, for the language so for the compiler, they remain different types.

      – max66
      Mar 22 at 8:08








    4




    4





    This is madness, this use of the comma operator, the long/int overload... Have an upvote. :/

    – matovitch
    Mar 21 at 21:13





    This is madness, this use of the comma operator, the long/int overload... Have an upvote. :/

    – matovitch
    Mar 21 at 21:13













    @matovitch - never underestimate the power of the comma operator }:‑)

    – max66
    Mar 21 at 21:16





    @matovitch - never underestimate the power of the comma operator }:‑)

    – max66
    Mar 21 at 21:16













    Will this work on platforms where sizeof(long) is equal to sizeof(int)?

    – Gregory Nisbet
    Mar 22 at 3:35





    Will this work on platforms where sizeof(long) is equal to sizeof(int)?

    – Gregory Nisbet
    Mar 22 at 3:35




    2




    2





    @GregoryNisbet - Yes. Because, for the language so for the compiler, they remain different types.

    – max66
    Mar 22 at 8:08





    @GregoryNisbet - Yes. Because, for the language so for the compiler, they remain different types.

    – max66
    Mar 22 at 8:08











    7














    template<auto> struct require_constant;
    template<class T>
    concept has_constexpr_data = requires { typename require_constant<T::get_data()>; };


    This is basically what's used by std::ranges::split_view.






    share|improve this answer




























      7














      template<auto> struct require_constant;
      template<class T>
      concept has_constexpr_data = requires { typename require_constant<T::get_data()>; };


      This is basically what's used by std::ranges::split_view.






      share|improve this answer


























        7












        7








        7







        template<auto> struct require_constant;
        template<class T>
        concept has_constexpr_data = requires { typename require_constant<T::get_data()>; };


        This is basically what's used by std::ranges::split_view.






        share|improve this answer













        template<auto> struct require_constant;
        template<class T>
        concept has_constexpr_data = requires { typename require_constant<T::get_data()>; };


        This is basically what's used by std::ranges::split_view.







        share|improve this answer












        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer










        answered Mar 21 at 21:48









        cpplearnercpplearner

        5,59222342




        5,59222342






























            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f55288555%2fc-check-if-statement-can-be-evaluated-constexpr%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            How to change which sound is reproduced for terminal bell?

            Title Spacing in Bjornstrup Chapter, Removing Chapter Number From Contents

            Can I use Tabulator js library in my java Spring + Thymeleaf project?