Xjyuk

Write to EXCEL from SQL DB using VBA script

Game of Life meets Chaos Theory

What happened to Rhaegal?

Survey Confirmation - Emphasize the question or the answer?

Can I use 1000v rectifier diodes instead of 600v rectifier diodes?

How to avoid grep command finding commented out strings in the source file?

Why is the SNP putting so much emphasis on currency plans?

Floor tile layout process?

What is the most remote airport from the center of the city it supposedly serves?

Why do money exchangers give different rates to different bills

Visa for volunteering in England

Is it appropriate to refer to God as "It"?

Does hiding behind 5-ft-wide cover give full cover?

Geometry - Proving a common centroid.

When do aircrafts become solarcrafts?

How do you center multiple equations that have multiple steps?

Why debootstrap can only run as root?

Entropy as a function of temperature: is temperature well defined?

Why do freehub and cassette have only one position that matches?

Unidentified items in bicycle tube repair kit

Can a cyclic Amine form an Amide?

How to creep the reader out with what seems like a normal person?

Public Salesforce Site and Security Review

An 'if constexpr branch' does not get discarded inside lambda that is inside a template function

An 'if constexpr branch' does not get discarded inside lambda that is inside a template function

C++0x error with constexpr and returning template functionPossible to instantiate templates using a for loop in a C++14 constexpr function?Calling `this` member function from generic lambda - clang vs gccInitializing a static constexpr data member of the base class by using a static constexpr data member of the derived classSFINAE constexpr with std::getStatic templated constexpr nested class memberShould decltype(foo(1)) instantiate the constexpr function template foo?Why can't lambda, when cast to function pointer, be used in constexpr context?False-branch of if constexpr not discarded in templated lambdaNested constexpr-if statement in discarded branch is still evaluated?

.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty height:90px;width:728px;box-sizing:border-box;

18

5

The following code:

#include <type_traits>

struct X 
 static constexpr void x() 
;

template <class T1, class T2>
constexpr bool makeFalse() return false; 

template <class T>
void foo() 
 T tmp;
 auto f = [](auto type) 
 if constexpr (makeFalse<T, decltype(type)>()) 
 T::x(); // <- clang does not discard
 else 
 // noop
 
 ;


int main() 
 foo<int>();

does not compile with Clang, but compiles with GCC. I can't see anything wrong with this code, but I'm not sure. Is Clang right not compiling it?

c++ c++17 if-constexpr

share|improve this question

edited 46 mins ago

Peter Mortensen

14k1987114

asked 5 hours ago

nicolainicolai

336211

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  worth mentioning that T is not dependant on the lambda template parameter. Don't know however how if constexpr should handle that.
  
  – bolov
  5 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  (somewhat) equivalent example without lambda compiles fine , so I suspect it's a clang bug godbolt.org/z/Xok1wC
  
  – bolov
  5 hours ago
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @bolov if you remove the generic lambda, it compiles too: godbolt.org/z/xoTBT6
  
  – Amadeus
  5 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

18

5

The following code:

#include <type_traits>

struct X 
 static constexpr void x() 
;

template <class T1, class T2>
constexpr bool makeFalse() return false; 

template <class T>
void foo() 
 T tmp;
 auto f = [](auto type) 
 if constexpr (makeFalse<T, decltype(type)>()) 
 T::x(); // <- clang does not discard
 else 
 // noop
 
 ;


int main() 
 foo<int>();

does not compile with Clang, but compiles with GCC. I can't see anything wrong with this code, but I'm not sure. Is Clang right not compiling it?

c++ c++17 if-constexpr

share|improve this question

edited 46 mins ago

Peter Mortensen

14k1987114

asked 5 hours ago

nicolainicolai

336211

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  worth mentioning that T is not dependant on the lambda template parameter. Don't know however how if constexpr should handle that.
  
  – bolov
  5 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  (somewhat) equivalent example without lambda compiles fine , so I suspect it's a clang bug godbolt.org/z/Xok1wC
  
  – bolov
  5 hours ago
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @bolov if you remove the generic lambda, it compiles too: godbolt.org/z/xoTBT6
  
  – Amadeus
  5 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

The following code:

#include <type_traits>

struct X 
 static constexpr void x() 
;

template <class T1, class T2>
constexpr bool makeFalse() return false; 

template <class T>
void foo() 
 T tmp;
 auto f = [](auto type) 
 if constexpr (makeFalse<T, decltype(type)>()) 
 T::x(); // <- clang does not discard
 else 
 // noop
 
 ;


int main() 
 foo<int>();

does not compile with Clang, but compiles with GCC. I can't see anything wrong with this code, but I'm not sure. Is Clang right not compiling it?

c++ c++17 if-constexpr

share|improve this question

edited 46 mins ago

Peter Mortensen

14k1987114

asked 5 hours ago

nicolainicolai

336211

#include <type_traits>

struct X 
 static constexpr void x() 
;

template <class T1, class T2>
constexpr bool makeFalse() return false; 

template <class T>
void foo() 
 T tmp;
 auto f = [](auto type) 
 if constexpr (makeFalse<T, decltype(type)>()) 
 T::x(); // <- clang does not discard
 else 
 // noop
 
 ;


int main() 
 foo<int>();

share|improve this question

edited 46 mins ago

Peter Mortensen

14k1987114

asked 5 hours ago

nicolainicolai

336211

share|improve this question

edited 46 mins ago

Peter Mortensen

14k1987114

asked 5 hours ago

nicolainicolai

336211

edited 46 mins ago

Peter Mortensen

14k1987114

edited 46 mins ago

Peter Mortensen

14k1987114

asked 5 hours ago

nicolainicolai

336211

asked 5 hours ago

nicolainicolai

336211

1 Answer
1

active

oldest

votes

11

[stmt.if]/2:

During the instantiation of an enclosing templated entity, if the condition is not value-dependent after its instantiation, the discarded substatement (if any) is not instantiated.

Since makeFalse<T, decltype(type)>() is value-dependent after the instantiation of foo<int>, it appears that T::x() should be instantiated per the standard, and since T::x is ill-formed when T is int, Clang is right not compiling it.

share|improve this answer

answered 5 hours ago

cpplearnercpplearner

6,24122544

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Wouldn't this reasoning imply that a hypothetical if constexpr (makeFalse<decltype(type)>) type.x(); would not be discarded either?
  
  – Barry
  3 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @Barry Yes. But type.x() is a dependent and possibly valid expression after the instantiation.
  
  – cpplearner
  3 hours ago
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  I think "possibly valid" is muddling things, I don't think that's relevant necessarily. Are you saying it won't be discarded even if makeFalse<decltype(type)> is false? Assume it's actually an interesting check... more like if constexpr (can_x<decltype(type)>) type.x();
  
  – Barry
  3 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  I am not convinced. Why then are my example and Amadeus compiling?
  
  – bolov
  3 hours ago
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  3
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @Barry Let me try to clarify. There are two instantiations that can be involved: (1) the instantiation of foo (2) the instantiation of f's function call operator template (which does not happen in OP's example). (1) does not discard either branch, because the condition is still value-dependent after it. If either branch is ill-formed after (1), an error will occur (but [temp.res]/8 may kick in when an expression in a branch is dependent). (2) does discard one branch because the condition is no longer dependent.
  
  – cpplearner
  3 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  

 | 
show 1 more comment

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

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);

Sign up using Google

Sign up using Facebook

Sign up using Email and Password

Post as a guest

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f55909018%2fan-if-constexpr-branch-does-not-get-discarded-inside-lambda-that-is-inside-a-t%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

11

[stmt.if]/2:

During the instantiation of an enclosing templated entity, if the condition is not value-dependent after its instantiation, the discarded substatement (if any) is not instantiated.

Since makeFalse<T, decltype(type)>() is value-dependent after the instantiation of foo<int>, it appears that T::x() should be instantiated per the standard, and since T::x is ill-formed when T is int, Clang is right not compiling it.

share|improve this answer

answered 5 hours ago

cpplearnercpplearner

6,24122544

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Wouldn't this reasoning imply that a hypothetical if constexpr (makeFalse<decltype(type)>) type.x(); would not be discarded either?
  
  – Barry
  3 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @Barry Yes. But type.x() is a dependent and possibly valid expression after the instantiation.
  
  – cpplearner
  3 hours ago
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  I think "possibly valid" is muddling things, I don't think that's relevant necessarily. Are you saying it won't be discarded even if makeFalse<decltype(type)> is false? Assume it's actually an interesting check... more like if constexpr (can_x<decltype(type)>) type.x();
  
  – Barry
  3 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  I am not convinced. Why then are my example and Amadeus compiling?
  
  – bolov
  3 hours ago
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  3
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @Barry Let me try to clarify. There are two instantiations that can be involved: (1) the instantiation of foo (2) the instantiation of f's function call operator template (which does not happen in OP's example). (1) does not discard either branch, because the condition is still value-dependent after it. If either branch is ill-formed after (1), an error will occur (but [temp.res]/8 may kick in when an expression in a branch is dependent). (2) does discard one branch because the condition is no longer dependent.
  
  – cpplearner
  3 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  

 | 
show 1 more comment

11

[stmt.if]/2:

During the instantiation of an enclosing templated entity, if the condition is not value-dependent after its instantiation, the discarded substatement (if any) is not instantiated.

Since makeFalse<T, decltype(type)>() is value-dependent after the instantiation of foo<int>, it appears that T::x() should be instantiated per the standard, and since T::x is ill-formed when T is int, Clang is right not compiling it.

share|improve this answer

answered 5 hours ago

cpplearnercpplearner

6,24122544

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Wouldn't this reasoning imply that a hypothetical if constexpr (makeFalse<decltype(type)>) type.x(); would not be discarded either?
  
  – Barry
  3 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @Barry Yes. But type.x() is a dependent and possibly valid expression after the instantiation.
  
  – cpplearner
  3 hours ago
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  I think "possibly valid" is muddling things, I don't think that's relevant necessarily. Are you saying it won't be discarded even if makeFalse<decltype(type)> is false? Assume it's actually an interesting check... more like if constexpr (can_x<decltype(type)>) type.x();
  
  – Barry
  3 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  I am not convinced. Why then are my example and Amadeus compiling?
  
  – bolov
  3 hours ago
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  3
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @Barry Let me try to clarify. There are two instantiations that can be involved: (1) the instantiation of foo (2) the instantiation of f's function call operator template (which does not happen in OP's example). (1) does not discard either branch, because the condition is still value-dependent after it. If either branch is ill-formed after (1), an error will occur (but [temp.res]/8 may kick in when an expression in a branch is dependent). (2) does discard one branch because the condition is no longer dependent.
  
  – cpplearner
  3 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  

 | 
show 1 more comment

[stmt.if]/2:

During the instantiation of an enclosing templated entity, if the condition is not value-dependent after its instantiation, the discarded substatement (if any) is not instantiated.

Since makeFalse<T, decltype(type)>() is value-dependent after the instantiation of foo<int>, it appears that T::x() should be instantiated per the standard, and since T::x is ill-formed when T is int, Clang is right not compiling it.

share|improve this answer

answered 5 hours ago

cpplearnercpplearner

6,24122544

share|improve this answer

answered 5 hours ago

cpplearnercpplearner

6,24122544

answered 5 hours ago

cpplearnercpplearner

6,24122544

answered 5 hours ago

cpplearnercpplearner

6,24122544