On 3/28/21 6:00 PM, Jason McKesson via Std-Proposals wrote:
> It should be noted that neither set of code that you presented
> constitutes a dangling reference. The temporary manifested by the
> default argument will be created by the caller of the function. As
> such, the lifetime of that temporary is defined by the location of the
> function call, *not* the boundaries of the function scope.

I know, what I have shown is the workaround directly, not the problem.

> As such, it is unclear what exactly you want to change about the
> language. It's also unclear why you would want to write code this way
> instead of just returning the string and letting the *user* call the
> function.

What I have shown is one case of the need for the revival of the named
return values, but using a workaround. For a proposal, the syntax could
use what GCC was using:

https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-2.95.3/gcc_5.html#SEC106

Also given the class should abstract all functionality, the user
shouldn't need to call the c_str() explicitly.

But again, this proposal is by far not the most urgent one because of
the existing workaround but it's only a matter of keeping everything as
clean as possible.

-- 
*Phil Bouchard*
Founder & CTO
C.: (819) 328-4743
Fornux Logo <http://www.fornux.com>