Yep, that was my thinking as well. Two things: 1. this is being used in a method that is widely used in both the <true> and <false> contexts, which I believe m

Yep, that was my thinking as well. Two things: 1. this is being used in a method that is widely used in both the <true> and <false> contexts, which I believe means that branch prediction would not be great if it was simply the same instruction sequence in both contexts. I could be wrong about that. 2. the major benefit that I saw was not duplicating the much more substantial code in the "..." sections (before and after the constexpr) and thus making maintainance and continued evolution of the code more reliable.