On Wed, Jan 29, 2025 at 3:55 PM Karl Semich via Std-Proposals <
std-proposals_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> Thanks, that wrapper solution is just the thing!
>
> I didn't find a way that move semantics would help with the argument case;
> the temporaries still go out of scope before data can be moved in (unless
> one uses a wrapper function, a patch, or writes their own generator).
>
> Given when a wrapper function is not used that the misbehavior is (a)
> severe, (b) undocumented, and (c) not reported by compilers and
> implementations, my personal opinion is still that this is a bug.
>
> The standard should clearly state that passing temporaries to a generator
> or defining temporary generators is illegal or at least undefined.
>
> However, if generators executed eagerly, it would prevent a wide class of
> these memory corruption errors.
>
> Move semantics may help address when generators themselves are defined as
> temporaries.
>

This to me reads like a great argumentation to put into a paper, that can
be submitted for inclusion into C++26 or 29. If we have a
known-bug-inducing current setup, that is not used much, that we can then
still fix and have working in C++26/29, it would make sense to write a
paper & to see if it can be seen at Austria - or shortly after. Teaching
everybody "generator is kinda broken and you need to define this wrapper
function" seems counterproductive, when we can propose to change
"suspend_always" to "suspend_never" in one location and fix it for
everybody.