"discards qualifiers" is less helpful than "discards const"

[L. Peter Deutsch]

> This is somewhat unfair to both sides.  On the one hand, putting the error
> message you want back is non-trivial because of the way the code has been
> restructured since 2.7.  It is not simply a case of reverting a patch.

Thanks for the information.  I had no way of knowing this.  I'm quite
willing to accept an answer of "The code has been redesigned, so
retrofitting isn't feasible, and the current error handling framework makes
handling this properly very awkward."  If that information had been in the
original response, I would simply have shrugged my shoulders and been
willing to wait for someone with more knowledge of the compiler to propose a
fix the maintainers would accept.

Thanks too for posting the hack patch.  As someone who spends a lot of time
worrying about keeping hacks (my own and others') out of his own code, I
would never ask for the inclusion of a hack in a public release.

I think I'll just stick with gcc 2.7.x and 2.8.x for a while.

-- 

L. Peter Deutsch         |       Aladdin Enterprises :::: ghost@aladdin.com
203 Santa Margarita Ave. | tel. +1-650-322-0103 (AM only); fax +1-650-322-1734
Menlo Park, CA 94025     |        http://www.cs.wisc.edu/~ghost/index.html