> Wiadomość napisana przez Jonathan Wakely <jwakely@redhat.com> w dniu 11.03.2024, o godz. 21:40:
> 
> On Mon, 11 Mar 2024 at 20:07, Maciej Miera <maciej.miera@gmail.com <mailto:maciej.miera@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> 
>> Hello,
>> 
>> I have tried to introduce an extra level of safety to my codebase and utilize _GLIBCXX_DEBUG in my test builds in order to catch faulty iterators.
>> However, I have encountered the following problem: I would like to utilize singular, value-initialized iterators as an arbitrary "null range”.
>> However, this leads to failed assertions in std:: algorithms taking such range.
>> 
>> Consider the following code sample with find_if:
>> 
>> #include <map>
>> #include <algorithm>
>> #include <iterator>
>> 
>> #ifndef __cpp_lib_null_iterators
>> #warning "Not standard compliant"
>> #endif
>> 
>> int main()
>> {
>>    std::multimap<char, int>::iterator it1{};
>>    std::multimap<char, int>::iterator it2{};
>> 
>>    (void) (it1==it2); // OK
>>    (void) std::find_if(
>>        it1, it2, [](const auto& el) { return el.second == 8;});
>> }
>> 
>> Compiled with -std=c++20 and -D_GLIBCXX_DEBUG it produces the warning "Not standard compliant"
>> and the execution results in the following assert failure:
>> 
>> /opt/compiler-explorer/gcc-12.2.0/include/c++/12.2.0/bits/stl_algo.h:3875:
>> In function:
>>    constexpr _IIter std::find_if(_IIter, _IIter, _Predicate) [with _IIter =
>>    gnu_debug::_Safe_iterator<_Rb_tree_iterator<pair<const char, int> >,
>>    debug::multimap<char, int>, bidirectional_iterator_tag>; _Predicate =
>>    main()::<lambda(const auto:16&)>]
>> 
>> The question is though: is it by design, or is it just a mere oversight? The warning actually suggest the first option.
>> If it is an intentional design choice, could you provide some rationale behind it, please?
> 
> The macro was not defined because the C++14 rule wasn't implemented
> for debug mode, but that should have been fixed for GCC 11, according
> to https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98466 <https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98466> and
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70303 <https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70303>
> So we should be able to define macro now, except maybe it wasn't fixed
> for the RB tree containers.


Just to make sure there are no misunderstandings: comparison via == works fine. The feature check macro without _GLIBCXX_DEBUG and with <iterator> included is also fine. Maybe the need to include a header is the issue, but that’s not the core of the problem anyway.

The actual question is though, whether passing singular iterators to std algorithms (like find_if) should make the asserts at the beginning of the algo function fail when compiled with _GLIBCXX_DEBUG. IMHO, intuitively it should not, as comparing iterators equal would just ensure early exit and return of the same singular iterator.
This seems not to be the case though. The actual message is this:
Error: the function requires a valid iterator range [first, last). 
What bothers me is whether the empty virtual range limited by two same singular iterators is actually valid or not.
This occurs with various std containers, I did check vector, multimap and unordered_map; I can check all the containers but I daresay it’s a pretty general thing.

Best regards,
A. M. Miera