On Mon, 6 Jan 2025 at 21:00, Arthur O'Dwyer <arthur.j.odwyer_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> That is not correct. Implementation vendors have reported that
>> supporting goto in their constexpr interpreters is a significant
>> additional
>> burden, and one unlike the burden required for supporting switch-case
>> or break/continue.
> Has any vendor said so publicly?

Publicly enough, on the reflectors. Here:
https://lists.isocpp.org/core/2023/03/14070.php

>Do the rumors indicate which vendor(s) allegedly said this — like, is this supposed to be a problem with Clang, GCC, MSVC, EDG, or someone else?

Clang, GCC, and MSVC at least, I do not recall similar statements from EDG.

Nota Bene: just because you don't know about something doesn't make it
either a rumor or an allegation.

> P2242, which was adopted for C++23 and lifted C++14's ban on `goto`'s appearing lexically within a constexpr function, sadly doesn't talk about either (1) whether there are technical difficulties with `goto` nor (2) why `goto` was so totally banned to begin with.

All sorts of things were totally banned, not just banned from being
hit by constant evaluation.