Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary

Em 10/19/2024 1:53 PM, Michael S escreveu:

On Sat, 19 Oct 2024 12:18:04 -0300
Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> wrote:
 

Em 10/18/2024 8:54 PM, Keith Thompson escreveu:

Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> writes:

I think constexpr keyword is unnecessary.

>
Sure, most language features are strictly unnecessary.
  

Anything you do with it could/should be done with const.

>
No, absolutely not.
  

>
If not, do you have a sample where, using "const" as "constexpr",
would create problems?
>
The sample I know is VLA.
>
const int c = 2;
int a[c]; //a is VLA because c is not a constant expression.
>
>
But this is not enough to convince me because it is better not to be
a VLA here.
>
>
>

 const int c = 2;
struct bar {
   int a[c];
   int b;
};
 

Yes, but in this case, you're changing something that was previously an error into something that now works.