gribozavr added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang/lib/Sema/SemaInit.cpp:7077 + // someContainer.add(std::move(localOWner)); + // return p; + if (!IsTempGslOwner && pathOnlyInitializesGslPointer(Path) && ---------------- xazax.hun wrote: > gribozavr wrote: > > Why is it a false positive? `std::move` left memory owned by `localOwner` > > in unspecified state. > I saw user code relying on the semantics of certain classes. E.g. they assume > if a `std::unique_ptr` is moved the pointee is still in place, so it is safe > to return a reference to the pointee. Do you think those cases should be > diagnosed too? It is... debatable. It is not obvious whether the lifetime of the pointed-to memory has ended or not without more detailed lifetime annotations. I think it is fair to silence it, however, I think the comment should be updated to explain the situation in a more detailed way, since without context it looks like a use-after-move. Repository: rL LLVM CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D64256/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D64256 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
