Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] fix warning about duplicate 'const' | From | Gabriel Dos Reis <> | Date | 10 Mar 2004 09:10:49 +0100 |
| |
Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net> writes:
| On Mon, Mar 08, 2004 at 05:32:11PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: | > Also, I'm not convinced this isn't a gcc regression. It would be stupid to | > "fix" something that makes old gcc's complain, when they may be doing the | > right thing. | | Problem is, that we're supposed to complain for | | const const int x; | and | typedef const int t; | const t x;
If I can help with an existing pratice, in C++ the former is invalid and the second is valid -- the extra const is just silently ignored. Therefore, in C++ land the construct
| const int a; | const __typeof(a) x;
would be accepted because __typeof__ acts like an unnamed typedef[*]. (And in effect, g++ will accept the code -- assuming you abstract over initializers). So, it does not look like an innovation here. I don't know whether this should be another case for "C is different from C++".
[*] Yes, an alias that does not introduce a name is strange alias, but that is what __typeof__ does.
-- Gaby - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |