c++: using constexpr to XOR data doesn't work - c++

Question

Here is my code:
template<int... I>
class MetaString1
{
public:
constexpr MetaString1(constexpr char* str)
: buffer_{ encrypt(str[I])... } { }
const char* decrypt()
{
for (int i = 0; i < sizeof...(I); ++i)
buffer_[i] = decrypt1(buffer_[i]);
buffer_[sizeof...(I)] = 0;
return buffer_;
}
private:
constexpr char encrypt(constexpr char c) const { return c ^ 0x55; }
constexpr char decrypt1(constexpr char c) const { return encrypt(c); }
private:
char buffer_[sizeof...(I)+1];
};
#define OBFUSCATED1(str) (MetaString1<0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5>(str).decrypt())
int main()
{
constexpr char *var = OBFUSCATED1("Post Malone");
std::cout << var << std::endl;
return 1;
}
This is the code from the paper that I'm reading Here. The Idea is simple, to XOR the argument of OBFUSCATED1 and then decrypt back to original value.
The problem that I'm having is that VS 2017 gives me error saying function call must have a constant value in constant expression.
If I only leave OBFUSCATED1("Post Malone");, I have no errors and program is run, but I've noticed that if I have breakpoints in constexpr MetaString1 constructor, the breakpoint is hit, which means that constexpr is not evaluated during compile time. As I understand it's because I don't "force" compiler to evaluate it during compilation by assigning the result to a constexpr variable.
So I have two questions:
Why do I have error function call must have a constant value in constant expression?
Why do people use template classes when they use constexpr functions? As I know template classes get evaluated during compilation, so using template class with constexpr is just a way to push compiler to evaluate those functions during compilation?

Answer 1

You try to assign a non constexpr type to a constexpr type variable,
what's not possible
constexpr char *var = OBFUSCATED1("Post Malone")
// ^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^
// type of var is constexpr, return type of OBFUSCATED1 is const char*
The constexpr keyword was introduced in C++11, so before you had this keyword you had to write complicated TMP stuff to make the compiler do stuff at compile time. Since TMP is turing complete you theoretically don't need something more than TMP, but since TMP is slow to compile and ugly to ready, you are able to use constexpr to express things you want evaluate at compile time in a more readable way. Although there is no correlation between TMP and constexpr, what means, you are free to use constexpr without template classes.
To achieve what you want, you could save both versions of the string:
template <class T>
constexpr T encrypt(T l, T r)
{
return l ^ r;
}
template <std::size_t S, class U>
struct in;
template <std::size_t S, std::size_t... I>
struct in<S, std::index_sequence<I...>>
{
constexpr in(const char str[S])
: str_{str[I]...}
, enc_{encrypt(str[I], char{0x12})...}
{}
constexpr const char* dec() const
{
return str_;
}
constexpr const char* enc() const
{
return enc_;
}
protected:
char str_[S];
char enc_[S];
};
template <std::size_t S>
class MetaString1
: public in<S, std::make_index_sequence<S - 1>>
{
public:
using base1_t = in<S, std::make_index_sequence<S - 1>>;
using base1_t::base1_t;
constexpr MetaString1(const char str[S])
: base1_t{str}
{}
};
And use it like this:
int main()
{
constexpr char str[] = "asdffasegeasf";
constexpr MetaString1<sizeof(str)> enc{str};
std::cout << enc.dec() << std::endl;
std::cout << enc.enc() << std::endl;
}