A20-8-2 / A20-8-3 - Is returning a non-owning pointer always a violation?

[misra cpp]

This code should not be reported as a violation of A20-8-2/A20-8-3, as these are about the explicit use of unique_ptr/shared_ptr, and not requiring their use in situations such as in the above example.

However, the code does violate A9-3-1 Member functions shall not return non-const “raw” pointers or references to private or protected data owned by the class.

We agree with the poster that replied “…concentrate on inline C++ wrappers around the POSIX stuff so that you minimize the number of places where you have to justify the violations.  A lot will be gained with proper layered system design.”