[Bug libstdc++/106183] New: std::atomic::wait might deadlock on platforms without platform_wait()

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106183 Bug ID: 106183 Summary: std::atomic::wait might deadlock on platforms without platform_wait() Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug c++/101247] New: ICE when using static constexpr bool defined in base-class in derived class constructor requires-clause

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101247 Bug ID: 101247 Summary: ICE when using static constexpr bool defined in base-class in derived class constructor requires-clause Product: gcc Version: unknown

[Bug c++/97452] [coroutines] incorrect sequencing of await_resume() when multiple co_await expressions occur in a single statement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97452 --- Comment #9 from Lewis Baker --- > In terms of the standard do you think this is technically undefined behaviour? Yes, I think this is something that Gor was looking into as a wording issue that could do with some clarification. I think the

[Bug libstdc++/99537] New: Wrong memory_order used in stop_token ref-counting

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99537 Bug ID: 99537 Summary: Wrong memory_order used in stop_token ref-counting Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug c++/97452] New: [coroutines] incorrect sequencing of await_resume() when multiple co_await expressions occur in a single statement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97452 Bug ID: 97452 Summary: [coroutines] incorrect sequencing of await_resume() when multiple co_await expressions occur in a single statement Product: gcc Version: