Boost C++ Libraries: Ticket #13099: How about adding BOOST_CONSEXPR to functions in rational where appropriate https://svn.boost.org/trac10/ticket/13099 <p> How about adding BOOST_CONSEXPR to functions in rational where appropriate. I shouldn't create any problems and would make boost rational more useful in current code. </p> en-us Boost C++ Libraries /htdocs/site/boost.png https://svn.boost.org/trac10/ticket/13099 Trac 1.4.3 Robert Ramey Tue, 27 Jun 2017 03:56:36 GMT owner changed https://svn.boost.org/trac10/ticket/13099#comment:1 https://svn.boost.org/trac10/ticket/13099#comment:1 <ul> <li><strong>owner</strong> changed from <span class="trac-author">John Maddock</span> to <span class="trac-author">Daryle Walker</span> </li> </ul> <p> Hmmm - I looked at the code and it seems I over reacted. Many of the functions are constexpr. The particular one I was interested in isn't. This function is operator * (.. The way it's implemented in terms of *= inhibits it from being constexpr. Perhaps the implementation might be tweaked to over come this. </p> Ticket John Maddock Tue, 27 Jun 2017 08:53:38 GMT <link>https://svn.boost.org/trac10/ticket/13099#comment:2 </link> <guid isPermaLink="false">https://svn.boost.org/trac10/ticket/13099#comment:2</guid> <description> <p> Hi Robert, now that gcd/lcm are constexpr I'm fairly sure this is possible now (in C++14 that is). However, since this isn't my library, and I'm pushed for time, my suggestion would be that you submit a PR ;) </p> <p> It would be good to have fully constexpr rational arithmetic though... </p> </description> <category>Ticket</category> </item> </channel> </rss>