[class], [utility], [time] remove redundant constexpr-suitable references to determine constexpr-ness of constructors/destructors
#8108
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…t be coroutines (since P3533R2), therefore they are always constexpr-suitable and removed wording is not needed.
…ors can't be coroutines (since P3533R2), therefore they are always constexpr-suitable and removed wording is not needed. Also removing redundant `constexpr` for constructor of duration which was enforcing `constexpr`-ness which is now default.
…can't be coroutines (since P3533R2), therefore they are always constexpr-suitable and removed wording is not needed.
|
The changes seems correct to me, but maybe CWG should have a look at this anyway to be sure. I would be in favor of deleting "constexpr-suitable" entirely; the term is just adding unnecessary indirection at this point, seeing that it's synonymous with "not a coroutine". |
|
The library parts of the changes overlap with LWG2833. Although I'd be happy to see these parts being fixed editorially. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
It occurred to me constructors/destructors can't be coroutines. Currently only remaining things which makes a function NOT
constexpr-suitableis function being a coroutine. Hence constructors and destructors can always be constexpr. Removed wording is redundant and no longer has any meaning.Question: I can go further and remove
constexpr-suitablecompletely by removing its definition in [dcl.constexpr], and replacing its uses withfunction is not a coroutine.