Constant expression initializer for static class member of type double

by

In C++03 we were only allowed to provide an in class initializer for static member variables of const integral of enumeration types, in C++11 we could initialize a static member of literal type in class using constexpr. This restriction was kept in C++11 for const variables mainly for compatibility with C++03. We can see this from closed issue 1826: const floating-point in constant expressions which says:

A const integer initialized with a constant can be used in constant expressions, but a const floating point variable initialized with a constant cannot. This was intentional, to be compatible with C++03 while encouraging the consistent use of constexpr. Some people have found this distinction to be surprising, however.

CWG ended up closing this request as not a defect(NAD), basically saying:

that programmers desiring floating point values to participate in constant expressions should use constexpr instead of const.

For reference N1804 the closest draft standard to C++03 publicly available in section 9.4.2 [class.static.data] says:

If a static data member is of const integral or const enumeration type, its declaration in the class definition can
specify a constant-initializer which shall be an integral constant expression (5.19). In that case, the member can appear
in integral constant expressions. The member shall still be defined in a namespace scope if it is used in the program and
the namespace scope definition shall not contain an initializer.

and the draft C++11 standard section 9.4.2 [class.static.data] says:

If a non-volatile const static data member is of integral or enumeration type, its declaration in the class
definition can specify a brace-or-equal-initializer in which every initializer-clause that is an assignment expression
is a constant expression (5.19). A static data member of literal type can be declared in the
class definition with the constexpr specifier; if so, its declaration shall specify a brace-or-equal-initializer
in which every initializer-clause that is an assignment-expression is a constant expression. […]

this is pretty much the same in the draft C++14 standard.

More Related Contents:

  1. Why are lambda expressions not allowed in an unevaluated operands but allowed in the unevaluated portions of constant expressions?
  2. Why does constexpr static member (of type class) require a definition?
  3. what is the concept of evaluation of expression z = (y = 30) + (y = 10) + (y = 20); [closed]
  4. Has C++ standard changed with respect to the use of indeterminate values and undefined behavior in C++14?
  5. Implementation C++14 make_integer_sequence
  6. Undefined reference to static constexpr char[]
  7. Differences between std::make_unique and std::unique_ptr with new
  8. Is it a conforming compiler extension to treat non-constexpr standard library functions as constexpr?
  9. C++11 aggregate initialization for classes with non-static member initializers
  10. Overload resolution between object, rvalue reference, const reference
  11. How to implement make_unique function in C++11? [duplicate]
  12. c++ access static members using null pointer
  13. Pointers in c++ after delete
  14. C++11: Correct std::array initialization?
  15. Can returning a local variable by value in C++11/14 result in the return value being constructed by rvalue when no copy/move is involved?
  16. Pass by value vs pass by rvalue reference
  17. Try to understand compiler error message: default member initializer required before the end of its enclosing class
  18. Default, value and zero initialization mess
  19. Is #pragma once part of the C++11 standard?
  20. Lambda capture as const reference?
  21. Are notes and examples in the core language specification of the C++ Standard non-normative?
  22. Is there an automatic noexcept specifier?
  23. Check traits for all variadic template arguments
  24. Which headers in the C++ standard library are guaranteed to include another header?
  25. How to immediately invoke a C++ lambda?
  26. error::make_unique is not a member of ‘std’
  27. What am I allowed to do with a static, constexpr, in-class initialized data member?
  28. Using std::make_unique with a custom deleter
  29. What’s the standard/official name for universal references?
  30. Reference invalidation after applying reverse_iterator on a custom made iterator

Leave a Comment