C++ Weekly - Ep 104 - Learning 'Modern' C++ - 4 : const and constexpr

☟☟ Awesome T-Shirts! Sponsors! Books! ☟☟

T-SHIRTS AVAILABLE!

WANT MORE JASON?

SUPPORT THE CHANNEL

GET INVOLVED

JASON'S BOOKS

► C++23 Best Practices

► C++ Best Practices

JASON'S PUZZLE BOOKS

► Object Lifetime Puzzlers Book 1

► Object Lifetime Puzzlers Book 2

► Object Lifetime Puzzlers Book 3

► Copy and Reference Puzzlers Book 1

► Copy and Reference Puzzlers Book 2

► Copy and Reference Puzzlers Book 3

► OpCode Puzzlers Book 1


RECOMMENDED BOOKS

AWESOME PROJECTS

O'Reilly VIDEOS

Source:

[tonyg]

From the title I was expecting some explanation of constexpr and const.

[brucewayne]

Title is misleading. You say it's about learning modern c++, yet you just use constexpr assuming everybody already knows what it is and why you use it. lol

[marioschmidt]

Why exactly is it valid code to declare do_thing() and do_other_thing() as constexpr? ASAIK constexpr indicates, that the compiler should evaluate something during compile time. But data+4 is generally dependent on the 'data' field.

[history]

What a waste of time. Label your videos correctly, this doesn't explain anything about constexpr

[AndrewHelgeCox]

Is `constexpr` the modern `inline`? I.e. if a function is passed arguments known at compile time, why wouldn't it try to run it at compile time without being told to by the person who wrote it?

[huyvole]

Sir can you tell me the name about Cppcheck analysis tool?

[akryuk]

clang probably wouldn't have complained if sizeof(long) had been replaced with sizeof(void*) which seems to be more correct, depending on what is meant by a 64-bit architecture

[ShivamSharma]

Honestly dude your explanation is blank, I understood wut to do but why I should do that was not explained properly. Some good C++ coder would explain everything in details along with wut compiler will do in the background.
I am not here to rote learn I am here to understand.

[GeorgeTsiros]

The very idea of not only allowing but also expecting _automated checking tools_ to _guide_ your programming and to _teach_ you, to me seems horribly, horribly wrong. Disastrously wrong. Against every principle behind learning.

[X_Baron]

Const has its place and purpose, but I don't like the idea that everything that can be const should be declared const. It clutters up code really fast and the benefits are often questionable.