See if passing by const& will satisfy all compilers

The only reason we had the `is_magnitude_integral` type members before
is because the compiler complained about incomplete types.  Passing by
`const&` might eliminate this need.
This commit is contained in:
Chip Hogg
2022-02-06 21:06:53 +00:00
parent 9593ca04d7
commit 7615de4720

View File

@@ -327,12 +327,10 @@ template<BasePower auto... BPs>
requires (detail::is_base_power_pack_valid<BPs...>)
struct magnitude {
// Whether this magnitude represents an integer.
static constexpr bool is_magnitude_integral = (detail::is_integral(BPs) && ...);
friend constexpr bool is_integral(magnitude) { return is_magnitude_integral; }
friend constexpr bool is_integral(const magnitude&) { return (detail::is_integral(BPs) && ...); }
// Whether this magnitude represents a rational number.
static constexpr bool is_magnitude_rational = (detail::is_rational(BPs) && ...);
friend constexpr bool is_rational(magnitude) { return is_magnitude_rational; }
friend constexpr bool is_rational(const magnitude&) { return (detail::is_rational(BPs) && ...); }
// The value of this magnitude, expressed in a given type.
template<typename T>
@@ -363,7 +361,7 @@ concept Magnitude = detail::is_magnitude<T>;
* Can avoid the need for an unsightly `.template` keyword.
*/
template<typename T>
T get_value(Magnitude auto m) { return decltype(m)::template value<T>; }
constexpr T get_value(Magnitude auto m) { return decltype(m)::template value<T>; }
/**
* @brief A base to represent pi.