public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "redi at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c++/108165] -Wdangling-reference false positive Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2022 13:31:57 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-108165-4-sUpTnVhL4e@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-108165-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108165 --- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Romain Geissler from comment #3) > In my real life case B was std::string and used a "string literal" at call > site, and I guess using the implicit conversion from const char[] to > std::string is something that might happen in many call sites in big code > bases. And in general that is not safe. const std::string& f(const std::string& s) { return s; } const std::string& s = f(""); // BUG Warning here would be entirely correct. A temporary string is created from the string literal, then a reference to that temporary is returned, and bound to another reference. This is a dangling reference, and a serious bug, and exactly what the new warning is designed to diagnose. > Is it expected that -Wdangling-reference doesn't take into account the > definition of f ? Yes. > The problem of dangling reference in general needs > function definitions to be effective, otherwise I fear there might be quite > some false positives. Yes, but not in a case like f(const std::string&) above. The warning is correct in most real cases. The situation for the code in comment 0 is different though, there is no A temporary. The temporary is the second argument of type B, and that isn't returned. This seems like a bug in the implementation of the warning's heuristics, not a problem with the design of the warning.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-12-19 13:31 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2022-12-18 17:41 [Bug c++/108165] New: " romain.geissler at amadeus dot com 2022-12-18 17:46 ` [Bug c++/108165] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-12-18 17:47 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-12-18 18:06 ` romain.geissler at amadeus dot com 2022-12-19 8:41 ` marxin at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-12-19 13:31 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org [this message] 2023-02-01 18:04 ` mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-02-01 18:14 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-02-01 18:20 ` mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-02-01 20:40 ` mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-02-01 21:55 ` mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-02-28 7:32 ` marxin at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-02-28 14:53 ` mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-03-02 8:30 ` marxin at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-03-02 16:30 ` mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-03-03 7:35 ` marxin at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-03-07 16:14 ` mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-04-18 0:55 ` mrsam@courier-mta.com
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=bug-108165-4-sUpTnVhL4e@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \ --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \ --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).