You can use std::initializer_list to prevent dangling issue:

```c++
auto [min, max] = std::minmax({a, b - a});
```

Robin Savonen Söderholm via Std-Proposals <std-proposals@lists.isocpp.org>於 2025年3月6日 週四，18:27寫道：

Hi!

I recently got burned by a piece of innocent looking code that was something along the lines of this:
```c++
auto [min, max] = std::minmax(a, b - a);
```
The problem stems from the fact that std::minmax (not initialiser_list api) returns a std::pair<T const&, T const&> regardless of what the arguments are AND that the structural bindings 'auto' is just making sure that the object being separated is not a reference, NOT that the objects inside [...] are not references...
In the best of worlds I would argue that `auto [x, y] = ...` would mean that `x` and `y` are pure values, but I guess such a change could cause trouble due to breaking currently working code that relies on the reference capture (and it would complicate the meaning of `auto& [x, y] = ...`).
A simpler option would be to change the API for the minmax function (and perhaps other, similar looking functions) to something where if an RValue is detected amongst the arguments, it would return a std::pair<T, T> only (or pair<T const, T const>), while if all arguments are lvalue references it could keep it's current form (for speed or for the need of testing the address of an argument or something..)

What would be the best remedy for things like this you think?

--
Std-Proposals mailing list
Std-Proposals@lists.isocpp.org
https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/std-proposals