On Fri, Sep 20, 2024 at 07:03:45PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> > The CALL_EXPR case in cp_fold uses !flag_no_inline instead, that makes more
> > sense to me.
> > Because checking "noinline" attribute (which means don't inline this
> > function) on current_function_decl rather than on functions being "inlined"
> > (the constexpr functions being non-manifestly constant evaluated) is just
> > weird.
> > If we really wanted, we could honor "noinline" during constant evaluation
> > on the CALL_EXPR/AGGR_INIT_EXPR fndecls, but dunno if whenever doing the
> > non-manifestly constant evaluated cases or just in special cases like these
> > two (CALL_EXPR in cp_fold, this in cp_fold_r).
>
> Checking noinline in non-manifestly constant-evaluated cases might make
> sense.
Though, if somebody marks some function explicitly constexpr they should be
prepared to get some constexpr evaluation of it, doesn't have to be strictly
standard required one.
And for -fimplicit-constexpr we already have "noinline" attribute check, so
maybe it is ok as is.
Jakub
