To const or not to const...

[Joseph S. Myers]

On Thu, 20 Feb 2003, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:

> > But, we're allowed to accept other things in an implementation defined
> > manner (para 10).
> 
> That sounds better:-) May I open a whishlist bug to get this
> implemented?

Such a bug will just be closed.  We don't want to add any new forms of
constant expressions (except for limited new syntax to make offsetof
properly constant when the bug that its present macro expansion counts as
constant is fixed, and possibly specific syntax that can be used to make
other things already used in initializers count as constant), we want to
get rid of the existing undocumented extensions to them instead.

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
jsm28@cam.ac.uk