It's not bad. But you can do better, and *much* better if you use a C++ 1z (17) compiler.
So the better error part is related to using a better compiler? this is not related to how I write my code or it is? It is just I did not pass on an elegant compiler error requirement before and I wanted to know if this is something related to the way I write the template function or just using a better compiler?
The "prove" is in bold for a reason: I want to see proof
So I had generated the assembly before and found that there is no assembly code for the function when it is called in a constexpr context, on the other hand it is inlined and code exist when it is called in non constexpr context. So the proof is just uploading the assembly code? -- View this message in context: http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/gsoc16-Static-Map-Competency-test-tp46833... Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.