Consider the following code: (https://godbolt.org/z/8W699x6q6) int* p; const int*&& r = static_cast<int*&&>(p); Note: const int*&& is an rvalue reference to a pointer...

I have the following code #include <iostream> void foo(const int* const &i_p) { std::cout << &i_p << std::endl; } int main () { int i = 10; int* i_p = &i; std::...

Consider the follow code: #include <iostream> class Data{ public: Data() = default; Data(Data const&) = delete; Data(int) { } }; int main(){ int a = 0; const std::string& rs ...

Is it ok to return default argument's value by const reference like in the examples below: https://coliru.stacked-crooked.com/a/ff76e060a007723b #include <string> const std::string& fo...

consider something like this: #include <iostream> struct C { C(double x=0, double y=0): x(x) , y(y) { std::cout << "C ctor " << x << " " <<y << " " << ...

Consider the following code: #include <iostream> float func(char const & val1, unsigned int const & val2) { return val1 + val2; } int main() { double test1 = 0.2; double test2 =...

Below is the code snippet: #include <iostream> using namespace std; struct B{ int b; ~B(){cout <<"destruct B" << endl;} }; B func(){ B b; b.b = 1; return b; } int main(){ c...

I know that const reference prolongs the life of a temporary locally. Now I am asking myself if this propriety can be extended on a chain of temporary objects, that is, if I can safely define: std...

Consider the following case struct A { operator int(); }; int &&x = A(); The spec says at http://eel.is/c++draft/dcl.init.ref#5 about whether the reference binding is direct or indirec...

I'm implementing some C++ static analysis rules, and one of them prohibits a function from returning a reference or pointer to a reference parameter of the function, i.e. the following are all non-...

Lets take a look to this two functions: std::string get_string() { std::string ret_value; // Calculate ret_value ... return ret_value; } void process_c_string(const char* s) { std::cout <&...