Subject: Re: [boost] Use constexpr with BOOST_STATIC_CONSTANT?
From: John Bytheway (jbytheway+boost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-12-12 14:44:36
On 12/12/11 12:59, John Maddock wrote:
>> Should BOOST_STATIC_CONSTANT be changed to add the C++11 "constexpr"
>> attribute, if it's defined?
>> I guess we would need a preprocessor flag to check if constexpr is
> We have a config macro for that, but I don't see what constexp can add
> in this case?
Clearer / earlier compile errors when the expression is not really constant?
Doing the right thing with UDTs, whilst still supporting integer types
on legacy compilers?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk