[Bug c++/95117] New: Segmentation fault with static await_ready() or await_resume()

[Bug c++/95117] New: Segmentation fault with static await_ready() or await_resume()

[oficsu at gmail dot com]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95117

            Bug ID: 95117
           Summary: Segmentation fault with static await_ready() or
                    await_resume()
           Product: gcc
           Version: 10.1.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: c++
          Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
          Reporter: oficsu at gmail dot com
  Target Milestone: ---

Created attachment 48527
  --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48527&action=edit
Minimal example

The attached archive contains a minimal example and a command that leads to an
internal compiler error in GCC 10 and later

Also, you can see the error on godbolt for gcc 10.1.0:
https://godbolt.org/z/CsJ4nG
The same error is reproducing in trunk version from godbolt:
https://godbolt.org/z/CsJ4nG


Working Draft contains the following definitions:
await-ready is the expression e.await_­ready(), contextually converted to bool.
...
await-suspend is the expression e.await_­suspend(h), which shall be a prvalue
of type void, bool, or std​::​coroutine_­handle<Z> for some type Z.
...
await-resume is the expression e.await_­resume().

Most likely the definition await_ready() and await_resume() as static is
ill-formed and should lead to a compilation error, but not to an segmentation
fault. BUT, please note that await-suspend is defined in the same way, but this
is compiled fine, so I'm not sure which behavior is right

[Bug c++/95117] Segmentation fault with static await_ready() or await_resume()

[oficsu at gmail dot com]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95117

Ofee Oficsu <oficsu at gmail dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Resolution|---                         |FIXED
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |RESOLVED

--- Comment #1 from Ofee Oficsu <oficsu at gmail dot com> ---
There's no ICE since GCC 10.2