P2350 constexpr class

[wg21bot]

P2350R0 constexpr class (Andreas Fertig)

[jfbastien]

We saw this paper in yesterday's EWG telecon:

POLL: we are interested in pursuing a way to specify that multiple/all class members are constexpr, either as suggested in this paper or through another mechanism, considering that time is limited and there is only so much work we can do.

SF	F	N	A	SA
2	5	2	2	0

Result: consensus.

POLL: support class-level consteval at the same time or before supporting constexpr, to inform the design of class constexpr.

SF	F	N	A	SA
2	8	3	0	0

Result: consensus.

POLL: use access specifier constexpr instead of class-level constexpr.

SF	F	N	A	SA
0	1	3	4	5

Result: no consensus.

POLL: class-level constexpr should also affect friend functions.

SF	F	N	A	SA
0	1	2	5	1

Result: no consensus.

POLL: it should be ill-formed to put constexpr on a class which can’t be entirely constexpr (e.g. because of its base or data members not being constexpr).

SF	F	N	A	SA
0	4	2	4	1

Result: no consensus.

POLL: static data members should also be constexpr in a constexpr class.

SF	F	N	A	SA
3	4	0	1	0

Result: consensus.

POLL: allow constexpr and final to appear in either order.

SF	F	N	A	SA
2	6	4	0	0

Result: consensus.

[wg21bot]

P2350R1 constexpr class (Andreas Fertig)

[jfbastien]

Seen in today's EWG telecon:

POLL: having seen what class-level consteval looks like, we still want it in P2350.

SF	F	N	A	SA
0	1	7	8	0

Result: consensus against, we don’t want consteval in P2350.

POLL: send P2350 to electronic polling, targeting CWG for C++23.

SF	F	N	A	SA
4	8	2	3	0

Result: consensus.

POLL: given that Committee time is limited, we’d like to see a different paper which further explores class-level consteval.

SF	F	N	A	SA
3	5	8	0	0

Result: consensus.

POLL: given that Committee time is limited, we’d like to see a different paper which proposes implicit constexpr.

SF	F	N	A	SA
7	4	1	4	1

Result: consensus.

[wg21bot]

P2350R2 constexpr class (Andreas Fertig)

[jfbastien]

2022-02 poll results:

SF	F	N	A	SA
12	12	9	5	2
Abstain: 5

Poll outcome:❌ no consensus