On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 9:30 AM, Dodji Seketeli <do...@redhat.com> wrote: > Gabriel Dos Reis <g...@integrable-solutions.net> writes: > >> We already have various predicates to test for constant >> expressions so I am uneasy to add yet another one. > > I understand. I got lost in the number of existing predicates to test > for constant expressions,
so am I :-) > to the point that I thought (wrongly) the one I wanted wasn't present. :-) > >> I think reduced_constant_expression_p is what you want. > > Thanks. I didn't realize this would work because the comment of > initializer_constant_valid_p (that it uses) says: > > We assume that VALUE has been folded as much as possible > > On a side node, as Jason said in the thread, we might not even need to > touch anything here, as check_instantiated_arg also assumes that its arg > has been fully folded. I guess I'll propose to update the comment of > that function to reflect that assumption. I read your reply. I am now even more puzzled than before. The call to uses_template_parm indicates that we expect that code to work when are also when processing a template (e.g. for non-dependent cases inside a template.) That makes me wonder how it could possibly work for the cases at hand because for non-type template arguments we need full instantiation information to determine convertibility and "constant"ness. -- Gaby
