Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • Home
  • SEARCH
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 954295
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 16, 20262026-05-16T00:11:35+00:00 2026-05-16T00:11:35+00:00

void Foo(Type^ type) { System::Guid id = type->GUID; switch (id) { case System::Byte::typeid->GUID: …

  • 0
void Foo(Type^ type)
{
  System::Guid id = type->GUID;
  switch (id)
  {
  case System::Byte::typeid->GUID:
    ...
    break;
  ...
  }

Obviously case expressions are not constant. But I’d like to know why GUIDs cannot be known at compile time? (silly question I guess).

At the end of the day it looks you have to use imbricated if then else for testing against typeid and thats the only way to go, right?

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 1 View
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-16T00:11:36+00:00Added an answer on May 16, 2026 at 12:11 am

    Simply put: the CLR has no metadata representation of a Guid… or indeed DateTime or Decimal, as the other obvious candidates. That means there isn’t a constant representation of Guid, and switch cases have to be constants, at least in C# and I suspect in C++/CLI too.

    Now that doesn’t have to be a blocker… C# allows const decimal values via a fudge, and languages could do the same thing for Guids, and then allow you to switch on them. The language can decide how it’s going to implement switching, after all.

    I suspect that the C++/CLI designers felt that it would be a sufficiently rare use-case that it wasn’t worth complicating the language and the compiler to support it.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

No related questions found

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.