On Tue, Jan 18, 2022 at 12:49 PM Barry Revzin <barry.revzin_at_[hidden]>
wrote:

>
>
> On Tue, Jan 18, 2022 at 12:29 PM Peter Dimov via SG7 <sg7_at_[hidden]>
> wrote:
>
>> > But on the other hand, if you have a `char const*`, it's trivial to
>> obtain a
>> > string_view from it, whereas the reverse... isn't.
>>
>> <source>:9:27: error: 'std::basic_string_view<char>' is not a valid type
>> for a template non-type parameter because it is not structural
>> 9 | template<std::string_view sv> consteval auto to_charp()
>> | ^~
>>
>> Yeah :-(
>
>
> This is actually a good reason to return string and vector<info> instead
> of string_view/char const* and span<info>. The containers will be usable as
> non-type template parameters (eventually), but the views will never be,
> and while char const* could be it's also not as usable.
>
> Barry
>

I take the highlighted part back, that was quite an overstep.
string_view/span could certainly become usable as non-type template
parameters. It's just that they would have to compare shallowly (e.g. if
you have two string_view's a and b such that a == b, you could still have
C<a> and C<b> be different types if a.data() != b.data()... )

Barry