Subject: Re: [std-proposals] Constexpr std::type_info::hash_code()
From: darkdragon (darkdragon-001_at_[hidden])
Date: 2020-12-05 09:13:34
`std::basic_string::operator==` adds constexpr versions in C++20.
`hash_code()` returns an integer which shouldn't be a problem anyways.
Furthermore, the thing about `constexpr` is that it *can* be evaluated at
compile-time but doesn't *need* to be. So it could still be used at
run-time in the presence of DLLs. Or am I overlooking something?
On Sat, Dec 5, 2020 at 3:52 PM Arthur O'Dwyer <arthur.j.odwyer_at_[hidden]>
> On Sat, Dec 5, 2020 at 9:05 AM darkdragon via Std-Proposals <
> std-proposals_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> It would be awesome if a constexpr version of hash_code() and
>> preferably name() would be included in the standard. Is there anything
>> more constexpr than type_info?
> Sadly, yes; `type_info` is intimately tied up with RTTI, and many
> implementations implement type_info::operator== as a string-comparison of
> the names of the types, so that it'll keep working even in the presence of
> dynamically linked libraries (DLLs).
> So your goal might not be literally *impossible*, but it won't be
> trivial, either.
STD-PROPOSALS list run by firstname.lastname@example.org
Standard Proposals Archives on Google Groups