NoQ added a comment. In D96215#2735546 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D96215#2735546>, @njames93 wrote:
> Just my $0.02, We shouldn't worry too much about pathological cases like > that. I imagine that code would almost never appear in the wild. And for > cases where you don't have access to definition for `hidden_reference `, > there's not much that can be done anyway. That's not what I typically tell myself; it really amazes me that for almost all such pathological cases there appear to be users who write such code on a regular basis. That said, this specific false positive with references (unlike the two lambda/block false positives in this patch and the next patch) wasn't derived from a bug report *yet*. So i'm not super worried about it. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D96215/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D96215 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
