[Bug c/68162] [5/6 Regression] Incompatible pointer type using a typedef

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

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68162

--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to joseph@codesourcery.com from comment #8)
> I don't know what DWARF semantics are meant to be, but the language 
> semantics are definitely that in C array types are always unqualified, 
> whereas in C++, while the qualifiers still apply to the element type, the 
> array type is also considered qualified for most/all purposes.
> 
> > When I just not do that main variant punning here I get
> > 
> >  <1><60>: Abbrev Number: 10 (DW_TAG_variable)
> >     <61>   DW_AT_name        : (indirect string, offset: 0x7b): harry
> >     <65>   DW_AT_decl_file   : 1
> >     <66>   DW_AT_decl_line   : 5
> >     <67>   DW_AT_type        : <0x75>
> > ...
> >  <1><75>: Abbrev Number: 6 (DW_TAG_const_type)
> >     <76>   DW_AT_type        : <0x49>
> >  <1><49>: Abbrev Number: 7 (DW_TAG_array_type)
> >     <4a>   DW_AT_type        : <0x39>
> >     <4e>   DW_AT_sibling     : <0x59>
> >  <1><39>: Abbrev Number: 5 (DW_TAG_typedef)
> >     <3a>   DW_AT_name        : (indirect string, offset: 0x0): Harry_t
> >     <3e>   DW_AT_decl_file   : 1
> >     <3f>   DW_AT_decl_line   : 4
> >     <40>   DW_AT_type        : <0x44>
> > 
> > instead.  Not sure about that "extra" const qualifier on the array type
> > though.
> 
> Does the extra qualifier come from decl_quals extracting qualifiers from a 
> decl to combine with those for the type?  My guess would be that such code 
> for extracting qualifiers is a legacy of when, a long time ago (before 
> <https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2001-06/msg00498.html>), the types of 
> decls in the C and C++ front ends did not include top-level qualifiers, 
> and so should be obsolete now.

I have no idea and my dives into dwarf2out.c have not been volutary for now ;)

Cleaning it up and removing cruft is always welcome.