On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 12:45 PM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 08, 2019 at 12:25:31PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > Maybe. The question is what exactly should we count. We could count only
> > in the cxx_eval_statement_list loop individual non-debug statements,
> > but that would miss
On Fri, Mar 08, 2019 at 12:25:31PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Maybe. The question is what exactly should we count. We could count only
> in the cxx_eval_statement_list loop individual non-debug statements,
> but that would miss statements that aren't in STATEMENT_LISTs.
> Or we could count
On Fri, Mar 08, 2019 at 11:36:36AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> Shouldn't we somehow limit the number of stmt evaluations instead?
> I can imagine using constexpr templates you can do "loops" easily
> without actually writing loops ...
Maybe. The question is what exactly should we count. We
On Thu, Mar 7, 2019 at 8:22 PM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> We have -fconstexpr-loop-limit= option to have an upper bound for constexpr
> evaluation of a single loop. Even with that limit in place, if we have
> several nested loops during constexpr evaluation, even when each could have
> a
Hi!
We have -fconstexpr-loop-limit= option to have an upper bound for constexpr
evaluation of a single loop. Even with that limit in place, if we have
several nested loops during constexpr evaluation, even when each could have
a few hundred iterations, the whole loop nest could take years to
