Re: [PATCH] fix warning about duplicate 'const'

[Gabriel Dos Reis]

Richard Henderson <rth@xxxxxxxxxxx> 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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/