Another compile-time perversion. Or not?

[Walter Bright]

Don Clugston wrote:
> Walter Bright wrote:
>> There's a bit of chicken and egg problem with it - can't tell if it's 
>> referenced or not until code generation, which is intimately wrapped 
>> up with object file generation.
> 
> But isn't it true that a template consisting only of
> 'const' and 'static if' will *never* result in code generation?

There can be:

template Foo(T)
{
     static if (...)
	const T x;
}

int* p = &Foo!(int).x;

> After it 
> has been constant folded, it will always be safe to discard it.
> 
> That might not cover all of the theoretically discardable templates, but 
> it would give almost all of the practical benefits.