I was toying a little bit with the indices trick to see where I could go to with and came across a strange error... First, the plain not-so-old indices:
template<std::size_t...>
struct indices {};
template<std::size_t N, std::size_t... Indices>
struct make_indices:
make_indices<N-1, N-1, Indices...>
{};
template<std::size_t... Indices>
struct make_indices<0, Indices...>:
indices<Indices...>
{};
I created a compile-time array class derived from a std::initializer_list
and had it indexable (assume that N3471 is support by your compiler. It will be in the next standard anyway). Here it is:
template<typename T>
struct array:
public std::initializer_list<T>
{
constexpr array(std::initializer_list<T> values):
std::initializer_list<T>(values)
{}
constexpr auto operator[](std::size_t n)
-> T
{
return this->begin()[n];
}
};
So, I tried to create a function that returns a copy of an array
after having added 1 to each of its members:
template<typename T, std::size_t... I>
auto constexpr add_one(const array<T>& a, indices<I...>)
-> const array<T>
{
return { (a[I]+1)... };
}
And to finish with the code, here is my main:
int main()
{
constexpr array<int> a = { 1, 2, 3 };
constexpr auto b = add_one(a, make_indices<a.size()>());
return 0;
}
I did not think that code would compile anyway, but I am quite surprised by the error message (Here is the ideone code):
In function 'int main()':
error: 'const smath::array<int>{std::initializer_list<int>{((const int*)(& const int [3]{2, 3, 4})), 3u}}' is not a constant expression
So, could someone explain to me what exactly is not constant enough for the compiler in the above code?
EDIT: Follow-ups for that question
- Is it legal to declare a constexpr std::initializer_list object?
- Confusion about constant expression