https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115908
--- Comment #12 from Iain Sandoe <iains at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #10) > my understanding is that the conclusion of CWG2563 is that this behaviour > was not the intended design - and the resolution to this is in PR119916. > > (so that, unless there's new information, this bug would be closed as > INVALID). since I made this comment - there has been another small adjustment to the resolution for CWG2563 that allows the promise to be used to initialise the ramp return.
