[Bug c++/15169] [3.5 Regression] " const" on the wrong side of type in error message.

["carlo at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>]

------- Additional Comments From carlo at gcc dot gnu dot org  2004-05-04 17:02 -------
I meant, even if that type is not a pointer.  A const on the righthand
side of a reference is rather nonsense :).

I mentioned this because the alternative way to correct this would be
to output 'const TYPE' rather than 'TYPE const' in the case 'TYPE'
is not a pointer.  However, I advocate the more consistent form of
'TYPE const' for compiler error and warning messages, which is correct
in all cases (whether or not TYPE is a pointer or not).

Personally I used both styles for many years now and found the 'TYPE const'
one much clearer.  For one thing it allows one to 'pattern recognize'
const-references easier, as they always end on 'const&'.  For example:
void f(Foo const&);
void f(Foo* const&);
both take a const-reference to something as parameter.

The clarity that I experienced would also benefit compiler error messages.
Only if the reader is USED to the 'const TYPE' style he'd prefer this over
the the alternative - but since the compiler is meant for everyone, the most
consistent and (once you are used to it) most clear method should prevail.



-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15169