https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119916
--- Comment #13 from Iain Sandoe <iains at gcc dot gnu.org> --- [IMO] I would suggest that GCC's behaviour (now) is the correct one [intended by the design]. Consider a request such as made by Ville "I want the ramp return object to be able to tell me if the coroutine suspended or completed". Noting that there are several ways in which a coroutine *might* run to completion before the ramp returns. That check cannot be made by looking at the promise object, since that object has been destroyed in a completed coroutine (and, of course, even trying to look at the promise - or continuing via a handle is UB). So to fulfil such a request, the information must reasonably be presented in the ramp's return object - and that implies that the coroutine body must be able to update said object. [Of course, one can consider other mechanisms with additional shared state - but that seems terribly convoluted when we already have a suitable place].
