A little change, the "constarg" should be replaced by "constexprarg" (though it is a bit lengthy, but more accurate).

// Possible syntax form 1b
if constexprarg (parameter_name) {
    // For cases where the parameter with specific name is constexpr
} else {
    // For cases where the parameter with specific name is not constexpr
}

// Possible syntax form 2b
if constexprarg (parameter_index) {
    // For cases where the parameter at a specific index location is constexpr
} else {
    // For cases where the parameter at a specific index location is not constexpr
}

________________________________
From: None <a1343922569_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Monday, April 28, 2025 7:46 PM
To: std-proposals_at_[hidden] <std-proposals_at_[hidden]>
Subject: Idea and proposal: Concise mechanism for detecting specific constexpr arguments within functions

Hello everyone,
I would like to propose a feature enhancement for future C++ standards that addresses a current limitation in constexpr-related mechanisms.

Motivation
C++20 has introduced std::is_constant_evaluated and consteval function, and C++23 further provided the "if consteval" expression, enabling developers to detect within a function whether "the entire function call" is in a constant evaluation context. However, these mechanisms cannot fulfill the need to detect whether "specific parameters" are constant expressions.

Problem Description
Consider the following function implementing "integer logarithm calculation" (, avoiding the need to define a separate function for special cases, and instead handling both general and exceptional cases within a single function):

uint64_t myLog(uint64_t a, uint64_t b) {
    // Calculate floor(log_b(a))
    if (isPowerOfTwo(b)) {
        // Optimized implementation for b being a power of 2
    } else {
        // Generic implementation
    }
}

When parameter b is known at compile time and is a power of 2, an efficient bit manipulation implementation can be used; but if b is not a compile-time constant, the condition check incurs runtime overhead.
This issue can be solved by using a non-type parameter template, but the function call must be written like "myLog<b>(a);", which looks unnatural and lacks consistency with "mylog(a, b)".
Existing "if consteval" can only execute a special path when all parameters are constexpr, but cannot optimize for cases where "only specific parameters are constexpr".

Proposed Feature
I propose introducing a mechanism to detect whether specific parameters are constexpr. Possible syntax forms include (but are not limited to):

// Possible syntax form 1a
if consteval (parameter_name) {
    // For cases where the parameter with specific name is constexpr
} else {
    // For cases where the parameter with specific name is not constexpr
}

// Possible syntax form 1b
if constarg (parameter_name) {
    // For cases where the parameter with specific name is constexpr
} else {
    // For cases where the parameter with specific name is not constexpr
}

// Possible syntax form 2a
if consteval (parameter_index) {
    // For cases where the parameter at a specific index location is constexpr
} else {
    // For cases where the parameter at a specific index location is not constexpr
}

// Possible syntax form 2b
if constarg (parameter_index) {
    // For cases where the parameter at a specific index location is constexpr
} else {
    // For cases where the parameter at a specific index location is not constexpr
}

// Possible syntax form 3
if (std::is_constant_arg<N>()) {
    // The Nth parameter is constexpr
}

With this mechanism, the above example could be rewritten as:

uint64_t myLog(uint64_t a, uint64_t b)
{
    if consteval (b) {
        if (isPowerOfTwo(b)) {
            // Optimized implementation for b being compile-time known and a power of 2
            return ...;
        }
    }
    // Generic implementation
}

This would provide possibilities for performance optimization without affecting interface simplicity.

Alignment with C++ Evolution
Since C++11 introduced constexpr, the standard has been continually expanding and refining constexpr-related features:
C++14 relaxed restrictions on constexpr functions.
C++17 introduced "if constexpr".
C++20 further extended the scope of constexpr and introduced consteval function and std::is_constant_evaluated.
C++23 introduced "if consteval".
This proposal represents a natural extension of this evolutionary direction.

Best regards,
Jin Haobo