https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59170
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Jan Kratochvil from comment #6) > This all depends more on a different non-pretty-printers feature I plan to > file for libstdc++ for years but I have never done so yet. With > -D_GLIBCXX_DEBUG the iterators could be memory-managed - they already track > their container by _M_sequence. The container could also track all its live > iterators, elements could track iterators pointing at them (and properly > invalidate them upon container updates) etc. Deleting the container would > invalidate all its iterators etc. Accessing an invalidated iterator would > then immediately assert. This is all already done, isn't it? Containers keep a list of active iterators (see _Safe_sequence_base::_M_iterators) which are automatically invalidated by the relevant container operations.
