https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108197
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Stephen from comment #2) > Richard, are you saying this a bug in the boost code? It's not quite clear > to me from your message. Can you be more specific about what the bug is in > that case? I wouldn't call it a bug in boost, it's simply unfortunate circumstances that trigger GCC diagnosing this which is likely dead code (but I see no way for GCC to prove it is dead)
