[PATCH 02/10] compiler.h: add is_const() as a replacement of __is_constexpr()

Martin Uecker muecker at gwdg.de
Sat Dec 7 14:59:09 UTC 2024


Am Samstag, dem 07.12.2024 um 22:50 +0900 schrieb Vincent Mailhol:
> On Sat. 7 Dec. 2024 à 22:19, Martin Uecker <muecker at gwdg.de> wrote:
> > Am Samstag, dem 07.12.2024 um 21:45 +0900 schrieb Vincent Mailhol:
> > > On Sat. 7 Dec. 2024 at 17:39, Martin Uecker <muecker at gwdg.de> wrote:
> > > > Am Freitag, dem 06.12.2024 um 16:26 +0900 schrieb Vincent Mailhol:

...


> > > But the core issue is that before getting this support in Linux, we
> > > have to wait for this to be added to the C2Y draft, then implemented
> > > in the compilers (probably just reusing the C++ constexpr functions)
> > > and finally wait maybe one more decade for the C2Y support to reach
> > > the kernel. For reference the kernel supports C11 only from 2022… So
> > > maybe we will see those in the kernel around 2037? Meanwhile, we have
> > > to deal with those hacks.
> > 
> > If we do not collaborate on proper solutions, then you might have
> > to wait much longer.
> 
> I was invited to WG14 this September. For now, I am only lurking. The
> thing I have in mind right now is to write a paper to allow the use of
> static_assert() in expressions (i.e. make it return 0 on success).
> That should be a relatively small change, but would bring a nice
> quality of life improvement.

Excellent, then I was complaining to the wrong person. 


Martin

> 
> For context, look at this:
> 
>   https://lore.kernel.org/all/CAHk-=wjLSEcZ5LdW+3C+9rtjvNPHZT6zdk0POj67T5k2ZpDbgA@mail.gmail.com/T/#m1ba33a804b4041154b72a1d0333f90ec7204c461
> 
> And I will definitely follow the progress of constexpr functions in C2Y.
> 
> 
> Yours sincerely,
> Vincent Mailhol



More information about the Intel-gfx mailing list