https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105810
--- Comment #3 from cqwrteur <unlvsur at live dot com> ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #2)
> Specifically, the suggested implementation is:
>
> template<typename __glibcxxassertiontype>
> [[noreturn,__gnu__::__cold__,__gnu__::__noinline__]]
> inline void __my_glibcxx_constexpr_assert() noexcept
> {
> constexpr __glibcxxassertiontype __assertinfo;
>
> __glibcxx_assert_fail(__assertinfo.__glibcxx_assertion_file,__assertinfo.
> __glibcxx_assertion_line,
>
> __assertinfo.__glibcxx_pretty_function,__assertinfo.
> __glibcxx_assertion_condition);
> }
>
> #define my_glibcxx_assert(_Condition) \
> { \
> if (!bool(_Condition))[[unlikely]] \
> { \
> \
> constexpr char const* __glibcxx_pretty_function_impl =
> __PRETTY_FUNCTION__;\
> struct __glibcxxassertion{\
> char const* __glibcxx_assertion_file=__FILE__;\
> int __glibcxx_assertion_line=__LINE__;\
> char const* __glibcxx_pretty_function="";\
> char const* __glibcxx_assertion_condition=#_Condition;\
> };\
> __my_glibcxx_constexpr_assert<__glibcxxassertion>();
> \
> }\
> }
>
>
> This instantiates a new instance of __my_glibcxx_constexpr_assert<T> with a
> new T for every assertion, but the actual call to __glibcxx_assert_fail is
> in a cold function instead of inlined into the assertion.
yep.
