diff --git a/docs/Issues.rst b/docs/Issues.rst
index 5cad604..dfc7514 100755
--- a/docs/Issues.rst
+++ b/docs/Issues.rst
@@ -1,53 +1,60 @@
 ==================================================================
 Known Issues with the Current Implementation of the RoSA Framework
 ==================================================================
 
 .. contents::
    :local:
 
 TODO
 ====
 
 * Project logo - `docs/_themes/rosa-theme/static/logo.png`
 * Packaging with
   `CPack <https://cmake.org/cmake/help/latest/module/CPack.html>`_.
 * What about design documentation on the basics of RoSA?
 * What about testing the framework?
 
 Known Issues
 ============
 
 The issues that are listed below are described assuming :ref:`minimal build
 dependencies <build_deps>` are met.
 
 * C++
 
   * The noexcept-specification is part of the function type since C++17 but
     `std::function` is not defined for noexcept template arguments. So we cannot
     enforce the expected noexcept semantics for functions stored in
     `std::function`. See affected functions
     `rosa::Invoker::wrap()`, `rosa::app::AppAgent::AppAgent()`,
     `rosa::app::AppSensor::AppSensor()`, and
     `rosa::app::AppSensor::registerSimulationDataSource()`.
 
 * MSVC
 
   * While :ref:`RoSA does not use exceptions <nortti-noexceptions>`, we cannot
     disable unwind semantics with MSVC because some included header files define
     functions that use exceptions.
+  * Versions of MSVC `v142` instatiate discarded sub-statements of `constexpr if`,
+    which typically causes error
+    `C2794 <https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/cpp/error-messages/compiler-errors-2/compiler-error-c2794?view=vs-2019>`_
+    because of undefined template specialization.
+    Specifically: `'Type': is not a member of any direct or indirect base class of 'rosa::app::MatchingAppTuple<T>'`.
+    The problem is similar to `this <https://stackoverflow.com/a/50857419>`_.
+    The older `v141` toolset does not have the problem.
 
 * Doxygen
 
   * "Potential recursive class relation" is detected for `rosa::GenSeq`, which
     is true if one ignores the template specialization for the terminal case.
     It would be nice not to have this pointless warning.
 
 * clang-tidy
 
   * Clang-tidy reports warnings about `noexcept` marking for the move
     constructor and move assignment operator of `rosa::Optional` in some
     situations when the template with the non-specialized argument list is used
     -- for example, in the file
     `example/application-interface/application-interface.cpp`.
     However, the condition for the `noexcept` marking should be met and the
     warning is pointless.