From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
	id 5F17638582AB; Fri, 10 Mar 2023 17:18:28 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 5F17638582AB
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1678468708;
	bh=biPhBcqUpvJ0VN5jx6CLwxHdFroV91HPyxB1iIuHiqM=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=n+pA15UTVhhXx5mSWmxke+NNx+UUa8MjiWGPuK/5hDeIrldaDxDC3YoNyckyJjSx3
	 W6JVLsI+WVWMqk593ZK8o50nx9a/rLjK7SKLEOLNlenB1fMLRLjj0+VNac6qDK49v7
	 BsfLmAZMCfcFM1UjN/txQ1oGx++crhRNQoQ7TfZg=
From: "mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/107532] [13 Regression] -Werror=dangling-reference false
 positives in libcamera-0.0.1
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2023 17:18:27 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 13.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: FIXED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P1
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 13.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-107532-4-wPLfOWcYa7@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-107532-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-107532-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.sourceware.org>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D107532

--- Comment #19 from Marek Polacek <mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Barnab=C3=A1s P=C5=91cze from comment #17)
> The simple test case with std::span still triggers the warning:
> https://gcc.godbolt.org/z/43cKxdqr3. I feel that without deeper code
> analysis such a warning will generate too many false positives and people
> will simply turn it off.

...but I could at least add a std::span check to fix this test...=