constexpr vs. static const: Which one to prefer?(constexpr 与静态 const:更喜欢哪一个?)
问题描述
For defining compile-time constants of integral types like the following (at function and class scope), which syntax is best?
static const int kMagic = 64; // (1)
constexpr int kMagic = 64; // (2)
(1)
works also for C++98/03 compilers, instead (2)
requires at least C++11. Are there any other differences between the two? Should one or the other be preferred in modern C++ code, and why?
EDIT
I tried this sample code with Godbolt's CE:
int main()
{
#define USE_STATIC_CONST
#ifdef USE_STATIC_CONST
static const int kOk = 0;
static const int kError = 1;
#else
constexpr int kOk = 0;
constexpr int kError = 1;
#endif
return kOk;
}
and for the static const
case this is the generated assembly by GCC 6.2:
main::kOk:
.zero 4
main::kError:
.long 1
main:
push rbp
mov rbp, rsp
mov eax, 0
pop rbp
ret
On the other hand, for constexpr
it's:
main:
push rbp
mov rbp, rsp
mov DWORD PTR [rbp-4], 0
mov DWORD PTR [rbp-8], 1
mov eax, 0
pop rbp
ret
Although at -O3
in both cases I get the same (optimized) assembly:
main:
xor eax, eax
ret
EDIT #2
I tried this simple code (live on Ideone):
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
int main() {
const int k1 = 10;
constexpr int k2 = 2*k1;
cout << k2 << '
';
return 0;
}
which shows that const int k1
is evaluated at compile-time, as it's used to calculate constexpr int k2
.
However, there seems to be a different behavior for double
s. I've created a separate question for that here.
As long as we are talking about declaring compile-time constants of scalar integer or enum types, there's absolutely no difference between using const
(static const
in class scope) or constexpr
.
Note that compilers are required to support static const int
objects (declared with constant initializers) in constant expressions, meaning that they have no choice but to treat such objects as compile-time constants. Additionally, as long as such objects remain odr-unused, they require no definition, which further demonstrates that they won't be used as run-time values.
Also, rules of constant initialization prevent local static const int
objects from being initialized dynamically, meaning that there's no performance penalty for declaring such objects locally. Moreover, immunity of integral static
objects to ordering problems of static initialization is a very important feature of the language.
constexpr
is an extension and generalization of the concept that was originally implemented in C++ through const
with a constant initializer. For integer types constexpr
does not offer anything extra over what const
already did. constexpr
simply performs an early check of the "constness" of initializer. However, one might say that constexpr
is a feature designed specifically for that purpose so it fits better stylistically.
这篇关于constexpr 与静态 const:更喜欢哪一个?的文章就介绍到这了,希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助,也希望大家多多支持编程学习网!
本文标题为:constexpr 与静态 const:更喜欢哪一个?


基础教程推荐
- 初始化列表*参数*评估顺序 2021-01-01
- CString 到 char* 2021-01-01
- 通过引用传递 C++ 迭代器有什么问题? 2022-01-01
- 为什么 typeid.name() 使用 GCC 返回奇怪的字符以及如 2022-09-16
- 为什么 RegOpenKeyEx() 在 Vista 64 位上返回错误代码 2021-01-01
- 如果我为无符号变量分配负值会发生什么? 2022-01-01
- GDB 显示调用堆栈上函数地址的当前编译二进制文 2022-09-05
- 我应该对 C++ 中的成员变量和函数参数使用相同的名称吗? 2021-01-01
- 非静态 const 成员,不能使用默认赋值运算符 2022-10-09
- 为什么派生模板类不能访问基模板类的标识符? 2021-01-01