[Bug c/68612] Const-compatibility in C
alexreg at gmail dot com
gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org
Thu Dec 3 22:32:00 GMT 2015
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68612
--- Comment #6 from Alexander Regueiro <alexreg at gmail dot com> ---
That’s good to know. Do we have a suitable developer to take on this project? I
would do it myself, but I’m not really qualified enough.
I suppose trunk won’t be in bug-fixing mode too long…
> On 1 Dec 2015, at 23:35, joseph at codesourcery dot com <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68612
>
> --- Comment #5 from joseph at codesourcery dot com <joseph at codesourcery dot com> ---
> I'd consider this a reasonable extension (not suitable for adding while
> trunk is in bug-fixing mode, of course) for default (non-pedantic) mode,
> similar to the extension to use C++-like rules for arrays of qualified
> type. Similar to that, it requires a lot of care to make sure it doesn't
> cause valid code to be rejected, as well as thorough testcases.
>
> (To be clear, the C++ rule is not symmetric between const and other
> qualifiers; it allows adding arbitrary qualifiers in certain places if
> const is present at all levels of indirection beyond those where any
> qualifiers are added. For this purpose, in C, _Atomic should not be
> considered a qualifier, and you'd need to think about how address space
> qualifiers are involved.)
>
> --
> You are receiving this mail because:
> You reported the bug.
More information about the Gcc-bugs
mailing list