https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118340
Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed| |2025-01-08 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> --- Reduced to (this assumes the front-end in testing has either __integer_pack or __make_integer_seq): ``` template<typename T, T...> struct integer_sequence { }; template<typename T, T N> using make_integer_sequence #if __has_builtin(__make_integer_seq) = __make_integer_seq<integer_sequence, T, N>; #else = integer_sequence<T, __integer_pack(N)...>; #endif #ifdef FAST template<int... i> static constexpr int v1 = ((i != 0) || ...); // fast #else template<int... i> static constexpr int v1 = ((i != 0) | ...); // slow #endif template<int... i> constexpr int foo(integer_sequence<int, i...>) { return v1<i...>; } int main() { static_assert(1 == foo(make_integer_sequence<int, 5000>{})); } ``` Confirmed. What is interesting if we use `||` instead of `|`, it is fast. This makes sense since PR 102780 fixed the `||` case but not the |, +, extra cases.