On December 3, 2024 3:33:22 AM GMT+10:00, Vincent Mailhol via B4 Relay <devnull+mailhol.vincent.wanadoo.fr@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >This series is the spiritual successor of [1] which introduced >const_true(). In [1], following a comment from David Laight, Linus >came with a suggestion to simplify __is_constexpr() and its derived >macros using a _Generic() selection. Because of the total change of >scope, I am starting a new series. > >The goal is to introduce a set of three macros: > > - is_const(): a one to one replacement of __is_constexpr() in term > of features but written in a less hacky way thanks to _Generic(). > > - is_const_true(): tells whether or not the argument is a true > integer constant expression. > > - is_const_false(): tells whether or not the argument is a false > integer constant expression. But why make this change? Is something broken? Does it make builds faster? > 7 files changed, 97 insertions(+), 84 deletions(-) It makes the code larger too. I don't see what the benefit is, and given how much time has been spent making sure the existing stuff works correctly, I feel like we should have a clear benefit to replacing it all. -Kees -- Kees Cook
